Hansard

I have taken two already; I must make progress.

We cannot predict which mum might suffer post-natal depression or which family might suffer bereavement, and that is where the real issue of workloads comes from. If we want to ensure that resources are concentrated on those who really need it, we need to do what we can to help children and families at the earliest possible stage. That is not diverting resources—it is directing them.

GIRFEC and the named person approach are supported by professionals, too. We know that they have a more positive impact on children’s and families’ lives when they work together. We hear that regularly—we hear it loudly in those tragic cases in which children have come to harm, and quietly but no less powerfully when it comes to helping children and families with the ordinary stresses and strains of everyday life.

Members should not take my word for it. Parenting across Scotland, Aberlour, Barnardo’s Scotland, Children 1st, One Parent Families Scotland and Action for Children are just some of the professional organisations that back the legislation. They back it because they know that the named person does not replace parents or professionals—of course it does not—but helps to make links between them if and when they need to be made. The named person is not someone new or unknown but a trusted person who is already working with the child and the family. The legislation simply builds on that trust and strong relationship.

The inner house of the Court of Session recently threw out the legal challenge to the named person; such a challenge has now been defeated twice. It found that

“The legislation does not involve the state taking over any functions currently carried out by parents”;

that

“The mere creation of a named person, available to assist a child or parent, no more confuses or diminishes the legal role, duties and responsibilities of parents in relation to their children than the provision of social services or education generally”;

and that

“It has no effect whatsoever on the legal, moral or social relationships within the family.”

Lord Carloway also said that the campaign narrative against the named person had “the appearance of hyperbole”.

I would suggest that the same description be applied to Ruth Davidson’s article and her party’s new approach on the issue. I stress the word “new”, because the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 was a long time in the making; it was not a bolt from the blue. However, it is being introduced at a time when we are seeing an assault from the blue—an assault by the UK Tory Government that will remove a staggering £960 million from the incomes of families with children in Scotland. If the Conservative Party wants to know what threatens family life in Scotland, it need look no further than itself.

The Conservative motion talks about the named person policy diverting resources away from the most vulnerable children. I remind the Scottish Conservatives that 36,000 children in Scotland now rely on food banks thanks to Tory austerity, and that the UK Government’s welfare reforms will push 100,000 additional children into poverty by 2020. If we wanted to divert resources away from the most vulnerable children, we would not have to look very far for ideas, but I am proud that this Government seeks to invest in our children rather than to deprive them.

The GIRFEC policy has been shaped over many years in partnership with professionals and parents. It has been supported and praised by parties across the chamber and by children’s organisations, and it has been tested twice in the courts. I have every confidence that the legislation is making a difference by making life better for children right across the country.

Challenges remain, and Parliament has a duty to scrutinise, but there is constructive scrutiny and there is politicking. Children should not be treated as political footballs, and I am afraid to say that that is what the Scottish Conservatives have done on this issue. I hope that they will reflect on that and return to taking a constructive approach to GIRFEC, as they once did.

I move amendment S4M-14999.2, to leave out from “believes” to end and insert:

“recognises the continuing cross-Parliament support that enabled the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 to be passed, which included putting Scotland’s national approach to improving children’s wellbeing, Getting It Right For Every Child (GIRFEC), on a statutory footing; acknowledges that the named person service is an important component of this approach, developed in response to parental demand during the piloting of GIRFEC in Highland to provide a single point of contact for all children and families to go to should they need support and advice; notes that the legal challenge to these provisions has now been rejected by the Scottish courts twice; welcomes the powerful collective effort by the public sector, third sector and parent/family organisations to make the duties drive improvements in the lives of children and young people, and calls on all members to support implementation of all the GIRFEC provisions of the Act as part of a shared ambition to ensure that all children in Scotland get the best start in life.”