Meeting of the Parliament 08 June 2016
Surely the difference between a GP and a named person is that a GP is there to assist, whereas a named person is there not only to assist but—behind the backs of parents—to discuss issues of wellbeing. [Interruption.] It is in section 19(5)(a)(iii). The named person is there to discuss questions of wellbeing—behind the backs of parents—with any “relevant authority”. Is that not a material difference between the universalism of general practice and the unnecessary universalism of the named person?