The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Naming no names

Posted on June 01, 2016 by

You can almost physically feel it. Scotland’s opposition and media are absolutely champing at the bit today to try to make some “SNP BAD” political capital out of the tragic and appalling death of little Liam Fee at the monstrous hands of his mother and her grotesque, controlling partner.

Like kids at Christmas, some of them couldn’t even wait for morning.

rdliamfee

But something odd struck us as we surveyed the coverage of the case: if the poor wee toddler had a Named Person, how come nobody could name them?

mailliamfee

The Daily Mail, amid a nine-page orgy of lurid and tasteless reporting on the story (of which the low point might be blaming Named Person for failing to prevent the fatal stabbing of Aberdeen teenager Bailey Gwynne), was the most explicit, claiming that it had “emerged last night” that Liam Fee had a Named Person in the shape of “a health worker”, which is an unusual definition of “name”.

damning

But that assertion, as well as failing even on its own terms and ignoring the fact that no system will or can ever be 100% successful at preventing abuse, is a complete and fundamental misrepresentation of what a Named Person is.

A Named Person is simply a first point of contact for concerns about a child’s welfare. Their job is to pass those concerns onto social workers, not to solve the problems themselves. (For example, many Named Persons will be teachers, with neither the training nor the legal powers to intervene directly, eg by taking the child into care.)

And in the case of Liam Fee, whether he had a Named Person or not – something which still isn’t clear – that definitely happened. As is exhaustively detailed in all the press coverage, the toddler’s injuries were repeatedly flagged to the social work department and the police, who simply failed to do anything about them, for reasons yet to be established by an inquiry.

In a slightly more nuanced editorial, the Herald notes:

heraldliam

The logical conclusion of that is that had Named Person been fully in effect, there would have been a better chance of saving Liam. Yet even in a piece that is indeed expressly entitled “Liam Fee case highlights potential benefits of Named Person policy”, the paper can’t stop itself from adding:

“There are certainly pertinent questions around the implementation of the Named Person scheme, but its critics should not be allowed to use this single case as ammunition to kill it off completely.”

(Our emphases. The implication of that sentence is that the scheme should only be partly killed off for now, until some other equally-irrelevant cases arise which allow the job to be completed.)

And even there, the Herald only goes to far as to say that the young boy had a Named Person “of sorts”. The Children And Young People Act of which the legislation is a part wasn’t passed until 27 March 2014 – five days AFTER Liam Fee’s death on March 22 the same year, although partial trials and pilot schemes were already in operation.

The Times, meanwhile, carries an editorial leader saying Liam Fee’s death calls into question the effectiveness of the ‘named person’ legislation” even as it admits that the measure is totally unconnected to it:

timesliam

The piece acknowledges that it was failings lying far beyond the responsibility of the Named Person that led to tiny Liam’s death, yet still contorts them into an attack on the new law. (The Times also carefully avoids saying that he had a Named Person at all, only vaguely noting that a pilot scheme was in place in Fife generally.)

The editorial ends with an insane paragraph of irrational drivel:

timesliam2

The paper frets about social-workers’ caseloads right after noting that hundreds of new staff are being recruited to help. It conjures a “deluge” of “new information”, ignoring the fact that if nothing’s wrong there’ll be nothing for a Named Person to report. And it turns a blind eye to the fact that there’s no way of telling a “loving home” apart from an abusive one in advance – abusers don’t all exceed a certain income level, support St Mirren or paint their front doors the same colour.

The only things we can say with certainty about the tragedy at this stage are:

1. There was a massive failing of the social work department

2. It was NOTHING TO DO with a Named Person.

A Named Person’s job – and we’ll repeat ourselves here because it can’t be said enough times – is simply to flag up concerns. Other people are then meant to act on them. Concerns about Liam Fee WERE flagged up, repeatedly, but then not acted on.

What we DON’T currently know is (a) whether Liam Fee specifically had a Named Person at all, (b) exactly which of their responsibilities had been activated if he did, (c) whether – if they existed at all – they were among the numerous people who reported their worries about his welfare.

(Right now we’re deeply sceptical, because if the Daily Mail knew for sure that there WAS a Named Person, we can’t for a second imagine the paper declining to name them. And if an NP can stay anonymous then the entire concept of them being a Named Person is a self-evident nonsense.)

In the end none of those things are actually very relevant anyway, for the reasons noted above. But what we know for sure is that anyone jumping the gun on them in an attempt to use this horrible, shocking, avoidable tragedy for political gain or to sell newspapers should be treated as the loathsome filth they are.

Print Friendly

    167 to “Naming no names”

    1. R-type Grunt says:

      Well said mate. It’s very interesting that the one person in this whole affair who has not been named or identified is the so-called *Named Person*.

      Unionists are sick in the head.

    2. Tamson says:

      And that final sentence applies very much to Ruth Davidson.

    3. Betty Boop says:

      In another universe, these papers would not be allowed to print such shoddy journalism. It seems most decent investigative journalists no longer (if they ever did) work for MSM.

    4. Hateful, unscrupulous, shallow, opportunists. Will get the backing of the knuckle dragging loyalists on the Hootsmon, etc online comments.

    5. Capella says:

      These people are despicable. That Ruth Davidson would use this tragedy as a political football is appalling. Once again, the MSM plummet to new depths and, thanks to Stu, the facts emerge online.

    6. Hugh Barclay says:

      And I thought Ruth and her Unionist cabal were against the named person scheme but now it’s not working well enough.

      This is the usual disgusting Unionist way of using the death of some poor unfortunate to bash The SNP.

      A wee side question or two, how many gay couples are bringing up kids? is that relevant?

    7. Just the M.S.M being their usual self. Anything to create an S.N.P baad link to any story, never mind this little boy’s appalling death. And what an odious person, as if we needed more proof, Ruth Davidson is, jumping on the media bandwagon proving she couldn’t give a damn about peoples feelings. Despicable.

    8. John Scott Charity says:

      “But what we know for sure is that anyone jumping the gun on them in an attempt to use this horrible, shocking, avoidable tragedy for political gain or to sell newspapers should be treated as the loathsome filth they are.”

      Says it all.

    9. MJack says:

      I also hate the way the media always use the phrase “controversial named person” when it is backed by alsmost every organisation which come into contact with childen but they’ve found a couple of groups who are against it and try to portray this minority as representing the country!

      The people who have made it controversial are the media. Those against the named person should really keep quiet for a while, nothing good will come of speaking against it at the moment. Anyway, it’s being implemented whether a minority are against it or not.

      I support it and my children will have named persons for another 10 years. I’m sure we wont need them but some people will.

    10. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “A wee side question or two, how many gay couples are bringing up kids? is that relevant?”

      No, it’s not relevant.

    11. The more sinister aspect of this is the fact that it is obviously a coordinated campaign being effected by a media under instruction.

    12. Luigi says:

      Despicable. Is there no depth to which yoon politicians and journalists will sink, just to score a cheap political point? They want people to respect the result of the referendum, and yet they cannot respect the feelings of people involved in this tragic case.

    13. Graeme Borthwick says:

      Well said Rev. The media are colluding to produce in Scotland the Feel Bad Factor. The sad story is intended to diminish the Self Confidence of the Scots; to make Scots ashamed to be Scottish.
      Few know the family come from Ryton, Northumberland. Apparently the biological father was a threat.

    14. I’m afraid the unionists won’t allow facts to get in their way of undermining the named persons legislation.

      If the Scottish Government hadn’t brought forward this legislation then it would being criticised for doing nothing to protect vulnerable children from abuse.

      I may have missed it, but I haven’t noticed the unionists having put forward any alternative proposals of their own to the named persons legislation.

    15. Bob Mack says:

      This makes my blood boil. That poor little infant.

      The named person had done their job.Social services were involved. It is they who let this infant down,not the named person. I had thought that after baby P ( who could forget) that guidelines and practice in Social Services would have been tightened up,but I was obviously wrong.

      Yes,I am finger pointing,and rightly so.This little mite was brutalised in the most heinous manner by those who should have looked after him. Broken limbs un – noticed, absences from nursery unheeded,warnings from neighbours not responded to.

      Heads better roll,especially on the management side.Shameful. They know families are not on specific warning lists for no reason.

      This child was abandoned to his fate by professionals who should have known better.

      I had an argument with a Labour supporter re the named person,and she was a Labour member. Her argument revolved around the unfairness of having to take on a role which was unpaid but added potentially extra work. I wonder how she feels this morning? Personally,I feel sick.

    16. proudscot says:

      I agree that Liam Fee was failed by the Social Work system for whatever reasons which the forthcoming inquiry will hopefully identify, which can then be put right. However, what Ruth Davidson fails to mention is the fact that Liam’s abuse and subsequent murder was carried out by his unbelievably cruel and sadistic mother and her equally culpable and loathsome partner.

      How typical for Davidson, no doubt to be followed by the other Unionist Party SNP haters, Baillie already rushing to put her tuppenceworth in, to use this tragic case for cheap political points scoring. They should be reminded of the saying that evil can only flourish when good people stand aside and do nothing!

    17. Dr Jim says:

      As always, in these cases the media seeks to blame somebody as if to suggest someone didn’t do their job or didn’t care enough or in this case the SNP idea to try and help kids is just rubbish so they’re to blame

      If they can nail blame somewhere, anywhere, then they get to do the calling for someones head to roll or a resignation by a government minister is always nice for them

      Once the media have got rolling with this sordid behaviour they gather up the human bewildered souls and commit them to public statements for or against (sensible dialogue not required) and the truth and the purpose fall into forgotten insignificance behind the usual wave of media distortion

      This case is new and raw and demonstrates quite clearly no legislation will prevent everything, but that’s not an excuse or a reason not to have it or we wouldn’t bother with any laws at all

      This political mischief making by the Ruth for Opposition Party and her allies in the stupid media (which is most of them really) is beneath contempt, but I do wish her all the publicity in the world on it so that everybody can see what a gutter raking vile human person will stoop to in order to get noticed

    18. Iain says:

      How unusual the press letting the truth get in the way of a good story.

    19. Les Wilson says:

      I am particularly angry with Ruthie, showing here her true Tory mindset.(expect her to do some back tracking now.) Lets be honest these people, this UK media will stoop to any level to pin ANYTHING on the SNP. A subject like this is simply deplorable, given their obvious end of day target.

      It does not matter what the subject is, it does not matter how horrible the subject is, it does not matter who it damages, as long as the SNP can catch some of the mud.

      Well done with a needed article Stu.

      Such is the Union we live in, time it was gone.

    20. Speedbert says:

      Thank you, was fizzing when I seen that headline today and you said it better that I could have done, with only my swear words to vent my frustration!!

    21. Jean Nisbet says:

      The people responsible for the death of Liam Fee are his mother and her partner.

    22. Broch Landers says:

      Well said.

    23. Holebender says:

      While not in any way supporting the various yoonery around the Named Person (if there was such) in this case, I do wish to question whether or not a Named Person could be named by the press. Is the Named Person to be known to the general public? What would be the point of that?

      It’s my view and expectation that the Named Person would be known to the family and various authorities (e.g. Social Work Department) but not to all and sundry. If I was a Named Person I certainly wouldn’t want hordes of tabloid hacks being privy to my details.

    24. Ken500 says:

      The awful Press convulsing itself in Lies. What a waste of paper. Tax evading non Doms.

      The Head of the Social Work Department has already stated Liam fell through the net because a social worker was ill and contact was lost. A named person could have helped prevent that happening. No system is fool proof from manipulating liars. Including the Press.

      The Unionists woud rather spend £Billions on Trident/illegal wars. Than on children and essential services. Scotland loses £10Billion+ a year on Unionst policies. It could be better spent.

      There are aircraft carriers to bomb the Middle East to bits , but no frigates to patrol the coast line. Resulting in the deaths of vulnerable children. Westminster criminals do not care.

      In a month SNP policies have been exonerated. The Named Person and OFA. Let any 2nd rate Unionist reject, attempt to change them.

    25. Brian McGrath says:

      The SNP are damned if the do and damned if they don’t. All the other parties just disagree with them no matter what the policy is. If they hadn’t brought in named persons then the opposition would be telling them they should be doing it and since they have brought it in they are telling everyone it doesn’t work. It’s all BS.

    26. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The people responsible for the death of Liam Fee are his mother and her partner.”

      Um, yes. While you’re here, any idea what religion the Pope might be?

    27. Ken500 says:

      It was Unionist politicians Labour and Green who likely took no appropriate action in previous complaints made in the Bailey Gwynne case. Complains that were not taken seriously. There is an Inquiry.

    28. stonefree says:

      Ruth Davidson is a Self Centered Egotistical Bitch devoid of any decency whatsoever

    29. shug says:

      Tokyo Kay’s call in this morning was giving it laldy. These so called journalists are worse than the perpetrators, with their gloating.
      They will be wanting to burn a social worker shortly
      You wonder how many people reported Jimmy Savile to the BBC and they did nothing!!

    30. Dan Huil says:

      The Ruthfuhrer shows her true red, white and blue colours and demands a SNPbaaad story based on the death of an innocent child. The britnat media obeys; they’re only following orders after all.

    31. R-type Grunt says:

      @ stonefree

      “Bitch”, really? Grow up FFS!

    32. Ken500 says:

      Nursery teacher’s brought complaints, neighbours brought complaints, horse centre manager’s brought complaint. Liam still fell through the net. They were also responsible for other children. A named person was not evident but was obviously needed.

    33. Robert Peffers says:

      BBC at it again. As we must always expect.

      Their theme today is to attack, “The Named Person”, legislation and unbelievably they are using the death of a tiny abused child as their weapon of mass media destruction.

      While, “The Named Person”, legislation was indeed under trial in Fife the NP system had fallen down in this case. This was mainly due to a combined failure of the Labour led Fife Council’s application of cuts in Scotland and the Tory failed austerity cuts for only the poor in the UK parliament.

      The very obvious truth is that the Labour led Fife Council application of UK Tory cuts in funding saw at least three different red alerts fail to initiate the NP legislation.

      Any one of those Red Alerts would have applied the Named person legislation and saved a child’s torture and his life. NP action thus failed simply because there was actually no named person assigned in the case of poor wee Liam Fee.

      An assigned Social Worker went on long term sick and Fife Council funding cuts prevented someone else being assigned to his tragic case.

      Known evidence plainly states that Wee Liam had, “Slipped through the Radar”, yet at least three persons reported being worried about his well being but Fife Council took no action and questions must be asked of Fife Council and heads roll. There was thus no replacement Named Person provided for him or action would have been legally required.

      Yet the totally despicable MSM, and particularly BBC Scotland, continue to lie to the electorate. How low can these unionist mouthpieces sink?

      How many more little children must die to support these totally inhuman idiots and their determination to keep Scotland in bondage?

      The BBC are thus broadcasting that, “Liam Fee had slipped through the Radar”, while at the same time using the toddler’s death to attempt to beat the SG over the head with his already broken body.

      I really feel physically sick at their sickening actions. We really need shot of these evil people.

    34. Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells says:

      Having been in the position where I have had to take concerns about vulnerable people to the social work department and the police, it makes my blood boil when I read of those organisations again being duped by plausible liars.
      All too often the response I got mirrors the responses I have seen quoted in this case, that the concerns were unfounded, that there were reasonable explanations for injuries/behaviour/incidents.

      When family members raise concerns, when teachers raise concerns, when neighbours raise concerns, when people passing in the street raise concerns, and NONE of them are listened to, when no-one joins the dots of a myriad of complaints from separate sources, then something is seriously wrong with the system.

      We NEED a named person system more than ever, and it is being endangered for the shallowest of political reasons: SNP BAD.

      The motto of the opposition parties is; if the SNP propose it, we’ll oppose it.

      For their selfish and narrow actions the likes of Ruth Davidson make me sick.

    35. Peter A Bell says:

      It is not often that I am at a loss for words. But I have been left speechless by the sickening opportunism of Ruth Davidson and others who have, with a callous glee that is utterly repugnant, pounced on this tragedy as a stick with which to beat the SNP administration.

      Actually, it’s not so much that I am lost for words as that I don’t trust myself to show proper restraint when expressing my true opinion of Ms Davidson and the despicable bandwagon she has leapt upon in the hope of scoring a few political points at the expense of any claim to dignity and decency.

      When such people are prepared to stand on the pitifully abused body of a murdered infant and call it the moral high ground we are entitled to ask whether little Liam’s murderers are the only monsters here.

    36. Petra says:

      We hear about these types of horrendous cases north and south of the border. In every one that I’ve ever read about the children in question were known to the authorities already. Over and over again they say we’ll carry out an investigation to ensure that it wont happen again and when finalised it’s the same old story. Too many people / agencies involved with a lack of communication between them such as the Declan Hainey case, Paisley.

      These cases came to light because the children were murdered. Surely having a named person whereby every child has someone to talk to would prevent not only the death of children but ongoing abuse of thousands of children that doesn’t result in a fatality.

      Nicola is doing her utmost to address issues such as sectarianism and child abuse. The Unionists are doing everything in their power to discredit her and undermine her party. No thought given to the victims and their loved ones. Worse still potential future victims. Let Ruth Davidson carry on. She’s showing herself up for the truly ignorant, spiteful, hateful person that she is and nothing will ever change that …. her.

    37. Giving Goose says:

      One of the major issues contributing to social problems, including those that are poverty related, is the Austerity programme adopted by the London Goverment.

      Social Work departments are working under great financial pressures where the route cause is funding issues created by London Goverment policies.

      Of course London Goverment is fully supported by Tories, LibDems and Labour in Scotland. Social issues are accepted as a price worth paying for Westminster rule.

      These Unionist parties are also totally comfortable with funding being cut to Scotland, yet they complain and make political capital when tragedies occur.

      Every tragedy that can be traced back to a lack of funding to a socially orientated provider of services is a responsibility that the Unionist parties in Scotland own and need to admit their culpability in.

    38. katherine hamilton says:

      It’s hard to know where to start with this. If Davidson can’t understand the not very subtle legal framework of the Named Person role why the hell is she in Parliament discussing legislation?
      Rev, your short concise outline above needs no additions. It’s that simple.

      I assume the inquiry will examine how this horror was allowed to unfold. Until then we should all hold our fire.

      Davidson’s opportunism borders on the pathological. She’s sick, stupid and frankly dangerous. I only hope Nicola nails her every Thursday noon and shows her up as the nasty and spiteful nonentity she is.

      RIP Liam.

    39. Cuilean says:

      South Ayrshire Council is a Tory led council backed up by the red tories, SLAB. They have been running a Named Person Scheme for the last 5 years.

      Ruth Davidson’s political hypocrisy here is breathtaking.

    40. Dan Huil says:

      “Have I got news for you”? When Davidson next appears I’m sure she’ll have a good laugh about it.

    41. Stoker says:

      Here, Ruthie, compare and contrast!
      The timeline at the end of the article is quite revealing.
      http://archive.is/0TWAu

      What i want to know is how a sick and retarded individual such as yourself can get away with the utter shite you spout and where is your outrage over the protection and cover-ups of your Westminster cronies, you know the ones, the paedophile network?

      Shame on you Ruthie! Rotten to your core!

    42. Robert Peffers says:

      @

      @Rev. Stuart Campbell says: 1 June, 2016 at 11:49 am:

      “No, it’s not relevant.”

      My own words exactly on reading that question.

      I’m 80 next birthday and have always done volunteer work, particularly among children, OAPs and those with educational difficulty.

      In all those years I can find no correlation whatsoever between the sexual orientation, nor of perceived social status, of people and cruelty of children, or cruelty of anyone else for that matter.

    43. Shame on ANYONE using this poor child’s death to a)sell lurid newspaper stories and b) for any political purpose.

      Those who stand against the Named Person (GIRFEC) legislation should hang their heads in shame. As someone who has experience of fighting a social work department in order to safeguard my grandson’s I am not surprised that the social work department accountable for overseeing little Liam safety failed him so badly and the same department will no doubt now trot out that old saying we’ve all heard on countless occasions “lessons need to be learned”. Until the heads of these departments are held truly accountable nothing will change and when you have department heads who tell you that the UN Conventions on the Rights of the Child does not apply to them, then signs the letter there is little hope for the Named Person legislation to work, because the UNCRC are the building blocks upon which this legislation is built.

    44. Effijy says:

      First thought is that wee Ruthie Krankie and
      The U.K. Media are no stranger to lies.
      Was there a named person?
      If so it would be totally unfair to pin blame
      On them and subject them to abuse.

      The NP Scheme was a success in Highland
      Region. Can you imagine the fake outrage
      From the Westminster Scum, sorry, politicians,
      If the project did not spread to other areas.

      I have now been subjected to move coverage
      On this matter than that surrounding Birmingham
      Council resigning from Child Protection as too
      Many English kids are dying and being abused.

      This has been going on throughout both Tory
      And Labour governments and yet they have
      Never attempted to change anything.

      Fair play to SNP for trying to improve on the UK
      Failing protection that they put in place.

      Please do remember the many stories about
      Paedophile Labour, Tory and Liberal MPs.
      Never has so much been covered up by so few!

      I have no interest in SNP politicians sex lives
      With other adults, but I do want to see paedophiles
      Brought to justice

    45. Iain Lawson says:

      It could also be suggested that Liam’s death reveals a staggeringly incompetent social work department within the Labour run authority.

      No headlines there, mind you?

    46. Valerie says:

      This is Ruth showing her true Tory side, and I hope those that give her, her bigger megaphone and platform feel pleased, that a dead child, abused all his life, is now political fodder.

      This default position of Tories, still shocks me. Remember Cameron has used his dead son on a few occasions, so it’s all fair game to them.

      I think the key facts here is that a social worker went off sick, and no one picked up the case, and crucially, a few in authority, appeared to think there were ‘plausible explanations’ of Liams injuries. They believed he was self harming or that another child inflicted the injuries.

      FFS!

      This child was badly failed.

      Because information sits with a number of involved people, it’s easy to pass the buck. This is EXACTLY why the NP is being introduced. One conduit whose responsibility it will be to stay on the backs of others to get cases progressed, attended to, actioned etc.

      I have witnessed the buck passing, and called it out many times, even though it wasn’t my staff/ department. My conscience wouldn’t allow me to sit on my hands, witnessing stuff like that.

      As I’ve said repeatedly, people that slag off NP are thick or unfeeling, or both.

    47. HandandShrimp says:

      If a safety railing is too low and someone falls over one does not remove the safety rail, one installs a higher one.

      Ruth seeks to deceive, she is not trustworthy. The Mail on the other hand is simply a waste of natural resources. We have been here so many times with that rag. One day they whine about the Nanny State the next they scream “Oh the humanity, won’t someone do something”.

      Incoherent oxygen thieves that they are.

    48. Callum says:

      The irony is that the Named Person legislation came out of the GIRFEC (Getting It Right For Every Child) which has an England and Wales equivalent called “Every Child Matters” (which came about after the Victoria Climbe case).

      The English ECM 2003 Legislation also has a named person scheme (in all but name) see p51 of the legislation linked below where one of the professionals involved with the child’s welfare is nominated as the single point of contact for that child and has the ability to “securely message” other departments so that a holistic picture of the situation can be understood. Their role is not dissimilar to that of a named person.

      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/272064/5860.pdf

    49. heedtracker says:

      Another day at the office for UKOK hacks but its stark display of just how much of a stuffed shirt Davidson really it . All just a nauseating product of revoltingly corrupt tory BBC led media and thick as shit tories.

    50. Robert Peffers says:

      @Jean Nisbet says: 1 June, 2016 at 12:16 pm:

      “The people responsible for the death of Liam Fee are his mother and her partner.”

      Yes Dear! We all know that.

      However, the point everyone is making is that their torture and subsequent murder of the poor wee unfortunate mite could, and should, have been prevented if, even the pre-“Named Person Act”, had been followed.

      Nothing could have prevented the initial abuse the toddler suffered before it happened for the first time, as no one could know about it except himself and his immediate torturers.

      Subsequent events did in fact trigger at least three different Red Alerts of action being needed yet in spite of this being brought to the notice of Fife Council and Fife Police no action to stop it was taken.

      Now there was indeed a trial of the Named Person act in force in Fife and that too failed to instigate official action even although the named person trial was going on and that has already been exposed as, “Liam Fee had slipped through the Radar”.

      Yet that Radar had indeed done its job as even the pre-NP act had not worked by instigating action by either the Fife Council Social Work Department nor by Fife Police or both. So the RADAR had worked but was not actioned.

      Three different sources made reports to the authorities but the authorities took no action. Therefore the NP system had done what it is designed to do. It alerted the authorities.

      The cruelty and murder were carried out by the family, their cruelty was notified to the authorities and the child suffered unspeakable torture and death because the authorities did not take action.

      Let us not allow the authorities to slope their collective shoulders nor let us allow the despicable unionist politicos to use a child’s death for political gain. Nor let us allow the unionist media to distort the facts for political gain.

      By the way, Jean, what’s your interest in ONLY blaming the already convicted parents of the child when the fact plainly indicate failure of Fife Council and the Fife Police? Just who is it you want to divert attention away from?

    51. Cuilean says:

      With repeated concerns raised about Liam, how were two other defenceless boys placed in the ‘care’ of two sadistic killers?

      This, too, on the day yet another enquiry is announced on yet another establishment cover-up of the 1974 Birmingham Bombing. Forty two years ago and alleged to go ‘all the way to the very top’ which I assume is the UK PM and Cabinet Ministers.

      The United Kingdom.

      Are you ‘YES’ yet?

    52. Alasdair Stephen says:

      Perhaps the journalists can’t do their jobs properly because they are time-pressured and under resourced? Maybe that is why they appear so shit at their jobs? Perhaps the social workers find it difficult to remove children from danger because of the multiple campaigns of vilification when they have removed children in the past? Campaigns led by these same journalists and their shitty papers.

    53. Mrs Grimble says:

      Shug @12.42: (OT) “You wonder how many people reported Jimmy Savile to the BBC and they did nothing!!”
      None actually. (End OT)

      I think Ruthie knew damm well what she was doing when she made this statement. Oh yes, she’ll apologise – but by then her lie that an abused child died in spite of having a NP will have stuck with people. Lies always stick and politicians know it.

    54. Robert Peffers says:

      Holebender says: 1 June, 2016 at 12:20 pm:

      “While not in any way supporting the various yoonery around the Named Person (if there was such) in this case, I do wish to question whether or not a Named Person could be named by the press. Is the Named Person to be known to the general public? What would be the point of that?”

      You totally miss the point, Holebender. The point is that even the existing system of notification of the authorities had actually already worked and both the Fife Social Work Department and Fife Police had been alerted to the child’s plight but the took no action.

      The whole idea of Named Persons is to alert the authorities but the authorities already knew of the child’s potential plight and had apparently investigated and did not take action. Three separate reports are recorded by the authorities yet they claim, “Liam Fee Slipped through the Radar”.

      Liam Fee Did Not slip through the Radar. The blip on the Radar screen was ignored by the authorities who did not take any action but had apparently investigated the reports.

      Read the actual words for yourself and ignore the media interpretations placed upon them that are intended to make you misunderstand their meaning.

      The child’s nursery reported probable abuse. A member of the public reported suspected abuse and there were other red alerts. That was not the problem.

      The problem was that in spite of at least three different alerts the authorities did not act. The indications are that a Social Worker went on long term sick and was not replaced by Fife Council. Liam did not slip through – he was ignored.

      His killers are being dealt with – now lets see the person(s), responsible for ignoring the problem brought to face the consequences.

    55. DerekM says:

      Disgusting immoral despicable tory political spin from the bottom of the cess pit that is unionism.

      I said it the other day fling a dead cat on the table,we need to stop being shocked by this tactic and point out the real culprits in this the council that failed this poor wee kid by doing nothing when all the signs said they should.

      Better to make an err on the side of being nosey than to turn a blind eye to it and then have a death and the circus of pass the buck yoon style,things must change and thank god the SNP are actually trying to do something about it.

      As for Ruth i have this strange urge to pelt her with rotten eggs.

    56. Jane Russell says:

      Thank you Alasdair Stephen. You have put your finger on a valid point.

    57. heedtracker says:

      Graun twits try every which way to avoid saying, its because we’re the tory press, duh.

      http://archive.is/G7aAe

      Russia Today (RT) is understandably keen on the story, retaliation for the unkind things we say about the Putin way of winning. So if Corbyn doesn’t make a fuss and leaves it to the SNP, Mike Crick and Russia Today, who will take up the charge?

    58. Iain More says:

      It took the BBC Yoon creep show less than a day to wheel out an expert from Abertay. They fuckin disgust me!

      When are the SNP going to take the gloves off with the vile monstrous Brit Nat Press and Media and the Yoon Parties? Getting sick fed up with them playing nice all the time.

    59. Richard Taylor says:

      One of the major difficulties with social work and child protection is knowing when to step in. Fail to rescue the child and you are pilloried for someone else’s heinous act. Jump in too early and you are pilloried for taking children away from loving homes on flimsy evidence.

      In most cases, the police are not blamed for ‘failing to prevent a murderer killing someone’; social workers are.

      It is right of the media to highlight failings of the authorities and that includes the Government. With child protection perhaps it would be better to highlight increases or decreases in the number of cases which result in abuse or murder rather than solitary incidents. To return to the police analogy we don’t see headlines like, “murder rates down 10% but police fail to prevent killing of tragic Mr J McNab of Montrose”.

    60. velofello says:

      Note the pst by Linda Silliman Millar above: “As someone who has experience of fighting a social work department…”.

      Now place yourself in the role of named person trying to have a social work department take heed of your concerns. What next for you if a tragedy such Liam occurs?

      And that question needs to be firmly placed on the desk of Head of Social Work in Fife. It is his/her responsibility to ensure there are no procedural cracks in the department’s workings.

      As for Ruth Davidson, I’m not surprised by her vile comments, par for the course, as time will demonstrate over the next few years.

    61. TD says:

      Ruth Davidson is using the propagandist’s oldest trick – put the lie out there and some of it will stick with some people. They are terrified that a conclusion of the inquiry will be that, had the named person scheme been fully operational, Liam Fee could have been saved. That would destroy their argument in the minds of the public. So to counter that, they are planting the idea that there was a named person and by implication that the scheme was fully operational and therefore ineffective.

      But even if it turns out to be true that the NP scheme was fully up and running in Liam’s case (and we certainly don’t know that at present), this will not prove that the system has no value. It will simply mean that it did not work for Liam. It could well be that it will work for others. The problem is that by definition, if the NP scheme works, nothing bad happens. That does not make for dramatic headlines and even in official reports, it will be hard to quantify the benefits. In the pilot areas, how many children are safe because of the NP scheme and who would otherwise have been harmed or neglected? I suspect we will never know.

      In such situations, it makes sense to listen to people who have expertise in the topic. Without exception, every organisation in Scotland with expertise in child protection supports the NP scheme. In a choice between Ruthie and the people who know what they’re talking about, I know who I would trust.

    62. bjsalba says:

      If Liam did have a Named Person, I presume that Ruthie can tell us at least when he/she was appointed?

      According to the National, Fife Council says the scheme was not universal in Fife.

    63. heedtracker says:

      When are the SNP going to take the gloves off with the vile monstrous Brit Nat Press and Media and the Yoon Parties?

      See rancid The Graun’s dodge on tory election fraud, UKOK mass media cover-ups.

      One massive UKOK thing Graun creeps don’t dare mention, the fact that if the toryboys start to lose their majority down to election fraud convictions and by-elections, SNP holds balance of Westminster power.

      If this does happen, Vote NO for The Vow shyst/Scotland Bill gets revisited and it will be a big change from “PAYE devo is all you’re getting vile seps, so shut it.”

    64. Wulls says:

      Stu, your last sentence sums it up perfectly.
      If ever there was a case to support NP this was it but their irrational, unyielding hatred for the SNP won’t allow them to admit it much less support them.
      I am also wary about blaming the social work dept. yes there were warning signs and yes again a more cohesive approach MAY have prevented this tragedy.
      However the blame lies firmly with the Evil pair of bastards responsible for this poor child.
      They will not enjoy prison but that won’t bring the kid back.

    65. Grendel says:

      If anyone wondered just how low the BBC could sink in it’s fight against the SNP, look no further.
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36425310

    66. Robert Peffers says:

      O/T

      Just noticed that Holyrood is to debate a total ban on Fracking.

      It will come about due to a Labour Party amendment to a Roseanna Cunningham proposal for a, “Sustainable low-carbon economy”, debate. I suppose that is fair enough although a moratorium effectively bans fracking anyway.

      Believe it or not, according to the BBC, the Greens have tabled an amendment, “speaking against it”.

      Typically the first problem is that the BBC report doesn’t make clear if the, “It”, the Greens are against is the Cunningham motion of, “A sustainable low-carbon economy”, or the Labour amendment of, “a total ban on Fracking”.

      If it is the original Cunningham motion then the Greens seem to be against Cunningham’s motion for a carbon free economy and that is hardly a green policy as gas is a generator of CO2.

      If, however, it is the second then the Greens are against a Labour motion of a full ban on fracking.

      In either case it means the Greens are for allowing fracking or at best a retention of the moratorium that could be construed as a temporary ban on fracking instead of an all out ban.

    67. heedtracker says:

      If anyone wondered just how low the BBC could sink in it’s fight against the SNP, look no further.

      BBC Scotland drag us all in to their sewer, smearing Scotland’s FM with death of a child

      “First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has refused to clarify whether murdered toddler Liam Fee had a “named person”.
      Liam was murdered by his mother Rachael and her partner Nyomi Fee in Fife.”

    68. Pardeep says:

      Never mind Rev, the DM will apologise for the article in about 20 years and you will write another article saying it’s ok cause they apologised profusely.

    69. heedtracker says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      1 June, 2016 at 3:25 pm
      O/T

      Scotland has to got to rethink what we understand as Scottish Green party. They are tory nimby’s. Its that simple.

    70. Papadox says:

      The yoon parties + EBC are the scum of the establishment and hammer of the Scottish people. Ruth, Wullie and SLAB have the morals and backbone of a SLUG.

    71. Graham says:

      1. There was a massive failing of the social work department

      With respect, how are you able to be certain of this before the conclusion of the relevant inquiry. I fear you may be seeking to apportion blame without first knowing all of the facts.

      As with your assertions, I fear that the named person legislation will serve only to apportion blame on individuals rather than organisations when tragedies occur.

      Let us never lose sight of the vindictive, manipulative parents of Liam who systematically and callously destroyed his life. Social work perhaps should have been involved however it a profession bound by legislation that often makes working with intelligent and manipulative parents extremely difficult. Also, let’s not pretend that social work departments are completely overstretched in the face of ever decreasing budgets.

      Finally, I would ask that everyone take a moment to think about the times that they have seen a child being mistreated and done nothing about it. It happens all of the time. People reported concerns about Liam and then appear to have believed that they had done all that they could to ensure his safety. Did they follow up their initial enquiries? Likely not. As a society we need to a bit of soul searching and start working collectively to avoid such tragedies occurring so regularly.

      If only the general public cared as much about vulnerable children as they do about, say, guide dogs for the blind or the dogs trust. If only!

    72. TD says:

      Grendel at 3:12 p.m.
      Heedtracker at 3:30 p.m.

      Perhaps I am missing something, but I cannot see what upsets you so much with that article. There are far more vindictive and biased anti-SNP articles on the BBC website than this one. I thought it was reasonably balanced – it headlines with Sturgeon’s warning to political opponents which is valid and then goes on to give what seems to me to be a fair summary of her position. She has quite rightly refused to go into the detail of the case – specifically on whether there was a named person. Is that what offends you?

      The article does talk about a “cautious” welcome for the legislation from a woman from the Scottish Association of Social Workers and quotes her. If the quotes are correct, then I think cautious welcome is a fair enough description of her position.

      I’m all for putting the boot in to the BBC when it is deserved (and it often is), but this article does not seem to me to be in that category. Obviously you both think it does so if you can explain why I will be interested.

    73. Ann says:

      The point being made is the reporting of MSM and Political spin being used to somehow blame SNP for failings of Named Person legislation.

      Named Person legislation did actually work in this case but the fact that no intervention was taken in this case may have been ultimate cause of this infants death.

      It maybe could have been avoided but I feel that if lessons are not learned from this tragic case another child will tragically lose their life.

      Grandstanding by MSM and Politicians are not going to prevent this from happening again, instead of blaming everyone now needs to come together and work out a way in which this does not happen again.

    74. heedtracker says:

      TD says:
      1 June, 2016 at 3:46 pm
      Grendel at 3:12 p.m.
      Heedtracker at 3:30 p.m.

      Perhaps I am missing something, but I cannot see what upsets you so much with that article.

      Well that’s nice for you. Various points then for attack propaganda students today from BBC Scotland

      Similar smear techniques used by printed British press attack propaganda, placing a front page close up of your hated politician next to horror story, front page.

      Then, why is David Cameron never approached when a tragedy happens like this in England land? Not just child murder but say the horrifying mass child abuse in Rotherham for example? Cant recall any BBC gimp wrapping any toryboy, let alone David Cameron into their coverage, let alone asking Cameron’s opinion.

      Then, why is the BBC Scotland creep show using this tragedy in their own on going anti SNP campaign in total? BBC Scotland opposes NP legislation and ofcourse they are not going to permit Scotland’s democracy to actually keep on evolving.

      So finally, BBC Scotland is a news media outfit, not a political party. Right?

    75. shiregirl says:

      Disgusting attempt at point scoring by Ruthie and a beyond sickening report by the BBC to point at the SNP and blame the Named Person. Hope Ruthie is made to apologise for the blatant opportunism and inappropriateness she has shown.

      I am utterly fed up at yoons et al blaming the SNP and the Named Person system for everything that goes wrong within child protection. Named Person has been in this area for a while. It works well. It’s better than the previous system which was, well nothing. It relies on communication so concerns can be discussed and addressed as often one small concern can mean nothing, but all together a few concerns can mean something that requires attention. It’s not a magic shield which protects kids, unfortunately, it takes people to speak out – Named Person is about people knowing who they can go to so concerns can be noted.

      I have reasoned on twitter to the point of wanting to punch my laptop at how they just don’t get it/refuse to get it. They suggest this is breaching privacy and for added tin foil hattery, data storing (or something) used for profiling and selling to the Iranians or others. Total nutters.

      I mean, how do you reason with zoomers?

    76. Dan Huil says:

      Sorry to butt in:

      “refused to clarify”

      Therefore blatant implication is that she has something to hide.

    77. TD says:

      Heedtracker at 4:03 p.m.

      So the only specific objection you have mentioned is that there was a picture of Sturgeon in an article about Liam Fee. Is that it?

      I agree with the broad sentiments you express about the BBC and I think their behaviour in the referendum, the UK general election and the Scottish elections (and all of the time inbetween) has been appalling. But I also think that when we attack them, as we should, it should be for something that merits it. I just don’t get your objection to this particular news item.

    78. Marie Clark says:

      Ruth Davidson and her ilk, really and truly are the lowest of the low.

      How disgusting, to try and use the death of this poor wee mite to make political capital. Utterly, utterly revolting. I could weep.

      Is this what we really can expect for the next five years since the tories won the Scottish election? Liars then, liars now. Truly replusive scum.

    79. Big jock says:

      it’s almost like they are blaming the SNP for the death of the child. They are ignoring the vile animals who carried out the act. You cannot stop a murderer in society. That’s what they do, it’s random. You can minimise the risk , but if anyone is suggesting we can prevent murders altogether. They are operating in a deliberately naive circle of thought.

    80. heedtracker says:

      TD says:
      1 June, 2016 at 4:11 pm
      Heedtracker at 4:03 p.m.

      That’s fine. Why do you like this report then?

      Google Rotherham rape scandal David Cameron and there is no BBC mention of David Cameron together with Rotherham anywhere by the BBC.

      This is in that search, England has to endure the tory BBC aswell though.

      http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2015/07/21/rotherham/

    81. galamcennalath says:

      “anyone jumping the gun on them in an attempt to use this horrible, shocking, avoidable tragedy for political gain or to sell newspapers should be treated as the loathsome filth they are.”

      Aye. Whoever expected this wee country of ours contained quite so much low life scum? Who thought there are those who would scrape below the gutter and along the main sewer?

      Is their fcking Union really so important to them?

    82. carjamtic says:

      Any new visitors to WoS,I urge you to check out both the BBC and STV reporting of FM on this tragic story,make your own mind up.

    83. stonefree says:

      R-type Grunt says:
      1 June, 2016 at 12:46 pm
      @ stonefree

      “Bitch”, really? Grow up FFS!

      Yes and No,
      She is a disgusting creature, I’ve been more than reasonable using language towards her, Today she over stepped……..IMHO…..So There you go

    84. Chic McGregor says:

      Correct me if I am wrong.

      But isn’t the main idea behind a named person that a child knows a specific person they can approach with an issue without fear of rejection and who will listen to their complaint? A person who is empowered to inform any authority of required services or indeed inquire of them any relevant information they hold on record?

      I think that is the idea, however a very young child would need to be old enough to be able to do that and surely special provision is made in that case.

      Where the child is very younger the named person would require the knowledge base to deduce issues without the level of child communication an older child would have. This would also require regular access in order to do so effectively.

      My point is, that for a very young child, the only sensible person who could be designated a named person would be initially a visiting post natal nurse, perhaps then the family doctor then a nursery worker. It really would need to be a baton that is passed on as the age of the child increases through early childhood and the named persons would be those who one would have rightly expected to have picked up and reported on those issues anyway.

      Once the child has reached an age where direct child generated communication is possible i.e. school age, then I guess that depth of ‘unilateral’ issue detection skills are not quite as important and more choices in named persons would be possible although I expect in most cases it would be likely to be their guidance teacher or similar.

    85. Chic McGregor says:

      Sorry.

      “a very young child would not be old enough to be able to do that “

    86. sam says:

      The Named Person scheme was not in operation in this area of Fife.

    87. Dr Jim says:

      o/t
      I’m sorry but I can’t take any more of this Idiot Green Paddys Market salesman Andy Wightman turning up in my parliament that I pay for and is seen around the world and this clown rocks up looking like something out of a peace demo wae clothes he’s slept in
      Haun Knittet vest, Nae Tie, Shirt sleeves rolled up and no shaved or brushed he’s bloody teeth

      I might be old fashioned or something but is there not a dress code that demonstrates a Dod of respect for the Parliament and the duties and office you’re supposed to be carrying out on behalf of your constituents and the Nation

      Does this man think my parliament’s a joke because I’m no laughin unlike parliamentarians in other places certainly will be

      I realise I must sound like Mr Grumpy of Tunbridge Wells
      but my dander is right up aboot this Victor, whit dae you say Jack

    88. Phydaux says:

      Ruth Davidson is pig ignorant and devoid of decency and humanity, just like her toxic Tory party.As Stuart succinctly points out, the shocking and disturbing tragedy is that Fife Social Work Dept failed to act on the serious concerns raised by others.

      There seems to have been a serious failure of management to take action when the allocated social worker went on sick leave.I find this truly disturbing not only because of the devastating consequences for this wee boy but also because it is likely to happen again if this is how they operate.

      The recurring themes from previous child abuse inquiries show that national standards, proper training, adequate resources and local leadership are all required in child protection work, which is highly stressful and requires skilled social workers with years of experience.

      Media witch-hunts distract us from the real point, which is that children are most at risk when in their own homes from those who are supposed to be caring for them.

      Fife Council has many serious questions to answer about their failure to carry out their statutory responsibilities towards this wee boy who was known to be vulnerable as well as the other 2 children in the household.Words fail me.

    89. The Isolator says:

      Sam @ 4.57

      If this is so then that fuckin half wit Davidson needs dragged over the political coals and then back again.

      The Labour shitehawk’s who voted for her in Edinburgh South need to take a long hard look in the mirror FFS.

      Enough of this shite …enough.

      I hope the FM verbally takes her fuckin face off at FMQ.

      I’m off oot on the lash tae calm doon.

    90. galamcennalath says:

      You know, I reckon this is all going to come back and bite all the critics and bandwagoneers, and make it clear why we do need the Named Person Legislation.

      It sounds like a Hell of a lot went wrong here, but if it turns out there was no Named Person then having one might have saved a life. Time will tell.

    91. Old dearie says:

      I am pleased to see that dr Jaqueline Mok is leading the enquiry. I have had cause to seek guidance from her on a Child Protection matter when she was lead Paediatrician in Edinburgh and was very impressed. I’m sure nothing will be swept under the carpet.

    92. Brian McHugh says:

      I have a question… if the scumbag MSM and unionist parties think that ‘Named person’ is not the answer, then what the **** is their solution? …and would it have avoided this tragedy?

    93. John Young says:

      I remember reading that the Scottish Health Service leads the world in monitoring persons with Diabetes. I believe a national computerised system was developed which flags up when any person with this condition should be seen by relevant medical persons, GPs, Consultants etc. All the results of all medical appointments are shown on the system.

      It continues to flag until the medical person has seen the patient so nobody falls off the radar ever.

      Surely a system like this could be developed to allow Social Worker Depts to monitor vulnerable clients and in particular, children.

    94. Orri says:

      There is as yet no clarity over whether the NP in this case was ill an not replaced or didn’t exist. Till that’s clarified there’s no coment anyone can make on this specific case.

      The definite theme seems to be one of caution. The mention in the BBC article of acceptance by Social work is that, contrary to what some may think, NP is meant to reduce workload by cutting out duplication of effort.

      My prediction is that what will happen is that there will be a slight delay whilst cosmetic changes or even an information campaign goes ahead and some of the parties claim crediit for curbing the exesses of the SNP

    95. Robert Peffers says:

      @Chic McGregor says: 1 June, 2016 at 4:56 pm:Sorry.

      “… a very young child would not be old enough to be able to do that.“

      Hi, Chic, I believe you may be a wee bit misled about the NP legislation.

      You can find a clear explanation by the SG of it here :-

      http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/named-person

      It doesn’t need the young person to approach the named person. For example if a parent, relative, nursery staff, hospital, GP or nurse suspect a child is being abused then they can contact a named person who will call in the correct authorities but more importantly the NP will assure that, as in the case of wee Liam Fee, the case does not, “Slip through the Radar”.

      The Fife Council Social Work knew of concerns about Liam as did Fife Police but he was allowed to, “Slip through the Radar”, (be totally ignored in spite of at least three different people reporting his suspected abuse).

      This is a recurrent theme in such child murders by abuse. One authority thinks another authority is dealing with the case and nothing gets done. An NP assures this is not allowed to happen.

      In any case the claim that Liam had an NP is a downright lie. The scheme was being trialled in Fife but it was not a full trial. Only selected parts of Fife were operating the trial.

      The truth is that both the Social work and police had been alerted and neither acted. It very much looks as if they each left it to the other. That is where an NP makes sure someone deals with the case and does so properly.

      But read the SG’s own explanation on the link provided for yourself.

    96. heedtracker says:

      Poor wee soul

      “Jeremy Corbyn: the BBC is ‘obsessed’ with damaging my leadership
      Labour leader complains about ‘shallow, facile’ media treatment and accuses some in party of aiding it in Vice documentary

      In response to Ferguson expressing concern about Labour’s performance in May, Corbyn said: “There is not one story on any election anywhere in the UK that the BBC will not spin into a problem for me. It is obsessive beyond belief. They are obsessed with trying to damage the leadership of the Labour party and unfortunately there are people in the Labour party that play into that.”

      That’s rancid The Graun tonight. S’funny how SLab aren’t bleating like this at BBC vote SLab Scotland much. Also hard to work out what JC expected.

      BBC England boosts blue tory UK, BBC Scotland boosts red tory/monsters Scotland on anything at all really. Its for our own good JC. He’ll come to appreciate that when he’s not elected to the rest home for aged Labour MP’s or as its formally known, House of Lords trough for life.

    97. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thanks for the analysis of the sadly typical MSM bilge on this very sad case.

      I really hope Ruth Davidson has cause to regret her words, although she seems to get away with her big, burly lies, doesn’t she?

      Some really humane and understandably angry comments here btl, although Phydaux summed it up pretty well for me.

      Incidentally, I was finishing “Murder in the High Himalaya” by Jonathan Green, about the murder by the Chinese army of a Tibetan girl trying to escape to India over the high passes and rediscovered an Orwell quotation the Rev. should have for his strapline, so important are his interventions in the world of media lies and manipulation:

      “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

      Carry on being revolting, please.

    98. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “With respect, how are you able to be certain of this before the conclusion of the relevant inquiry.”

      Because their job was to stop Liam Fee becoming dead, and he IS dead. They’ve failed. QED.

    99. Robert Peffers says:

      @Orri says: 1 June, 2016 at 6:15 pm:

      “There is as yet no clarity over whether the NP in this case was ill an not replaced or didn’t exist. Till that’s clarified there’s no coment anyone can make on this specific case.”

      There is information, Orri. Liam had been reported several times, among others, by a Nursery School Nurse and a member of the public. His case had been investigated by both a social worker and Fife Police but both had concluded there was valid explanations for his known injuries.

      His parents then withdrew him from the nursery and the Social worker he was assigned went on long term sick leave and was not replaced. There is nothing yet said of whether the police had just dropped the case or left it to the Social Work Dept.

      As to a named person – the Fife Trial did not cover all Fife so Liam seems not to have had a named person assigned as he was not in an area covered by the scheme.

      So the known and verified facts are that Social Work and Fife Police were alerted by at least three different sources and they claim, “Liam slipped through the Radar”.

      So if he slipped through the RADAR they confirm he was on the Radar and they did nothing to prevent his abuse.
      Read that as, “We knew about him but did nothing”.

    100. heedtracker says:

      They’re baaaaaaaaaaaaack.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36420569

      If just one of this horrible crew would have the decency to say out loud, “Project Fear 2014 threatened YES Scots with instant exit from the EU and a decade wait in the Q to get back in.”

    101. call me dave says:

      O/T
      Fracking:

      The SNP abstained on all amendments calling for a ban, clearing the way for Labour’s wrecking amendment and effectively making an outright ban the official will of the parliament.

      https://archive.is/r93rt

    102. Graham says:

      ‘Because their job was to stop Liam Fee becoming dead, and he IS dead. They’ve failed. QED.’

      I think you will find that the protection of children is the responsibility of everyone in a civilised society. To simply apportion blame at the feet of the social work department (without conclusive evidence) absolves everyone who came into contact with Liam of their responsibility to keep him safe. Far too simple an argument from you, Rev.

    103. galamcennalath says:

      The Rev just tweeted this …

      https://t.co/PWQghdMILD

      .. FFS. It’s time the SG stood up to the Home Office over emigration. This guy has been here 14 years and describes himself as Scottish. He has been doing valuable unpaid work and this has offended the Home Office.

      Time to tell the Home Office to fck off out of Scotland and stay in the Home Counties.

    104. Brian McHugh says:

      call me dave, If the SNP voted to ban fracking, then one successful legal challenge later, fracking is sanctioned.

      The SNP were never going to vote for fracking, so the only position left was to abstain.

      I might be wrong, but I believe the amendment is not binding or some political mumbo jumbo, so we will see what happens… but I will never forgive the Greens if we end up with fracking due to their tunnel vision.

    105. Ken500 says:

      The fracking voted is meaningless. The Greens and Labour, LibDems are against, the Tories are for. In any event the SNP + Tories would see it through or the SNP + Grend, Labour, LibDems could be against.

      Either way the SNP decide.

      Frack US gas in being imported into Grangemouth. Gas is being fracked in the rest of he UK. There is no separate distribution system in the UK. Gas was extracted in the central belt from 1900’s to the 1960’s when it ran out. Hydro was introduced 1948 to 1960’s. It is still being used.

      The 2nd rate reject Toryman said it was unfair that unemployed Oil & Gas workers could not benefit from a job at Grangemouth or fracking. Osbourne was taxing the Oil sector at 60/80% when prices had fallen 75%. It is still taxed at 40%. Losing thousand of jobs in Scotland (without an alternative). The Tories no enterprise and high taxes. Total hypocrites. More Oil & Gas has to be imported putting up the deficit and the debt.

    106. Grendel says:

      TD, BBC Scotland News on twitter posted the following text with a link to the story I previously referred to:
      @NicolaSturgeon refuses to clarify if Liam Fee had a “named person”

      That’s gutter journalism full stop. If all you see is the BBC tweet and don’t read the article in detail, as many people don’t, then the implication is that Sturgeon has something to hide and is engaged in a cover up.

      Indeed some of the responses would back that up:
      @JRuddy99 “Which probably means he did. Because if he hadn’t she would use this as another reason for NP.

    107. Ken500 says:

      Social services and essential services can be notoriously underfunded. Some councils would rather build, unwanted grotesque carbuncles getting cities into £Millions of debt, than fund essential services. May 2017

    108. Grendel says:

      “Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      1 June, 2016 at 6:48 pm
      “With respect, how are you able to be certain of this before the conclusion of the relevant inquiry.”

      Because their job was to stop Liam Fee becoming dead, and he IS dead. They’ve failed. QED.”

      No. We can be certain because they have admitted he was in the system and “fell through the cracks”. Their words, not mine.

    109. Ken500 says:

      The debate wasn’t about fracking. It was an amendment attached on by the unelected 2nd raters to cause trouble,

    110. Ken500 says:

      The debate wasn’t about fracking. The vote was an amendment hitched on by the 2nd rate rejects to cause trouble.

    111. brobb says:

      If the information in the National today is right it sounds as if the Named Person scheme was not being used in Fife (at least at the time of Liam’s death 2 years ago). The national reports that the nursery staff passed on their concerns to social services, and the childminder to SCMA (childminding association) and the Care Inspectorate. The Named person for a child of Liam’s age would be the Health Visitor (NP for children under 5). This is just my opinion based on what I’ve read so far but this suggests the named person scheme was not used here.

      Speculation, political innuendo and hasty headlines are not helpful here. The serious case review will look at all the facts in this case and then report on what went wrong, until then no one of us can be sure what the facts are and what went wrong. Nicola Sturgeon rightly said that no system can ever guarantee that every child will live free from harm but there is nothing I have read yet that suggests the Named Person scheme is fatally flawed.

      One person interviewed on RS tonight (sorry, didn’t catch the name) stated that fears of social work case overloads should actually be lessened by the NP scheme because minor cases flagged up to the NP will be dealt with leaving social workers able to focus on more serious concerns. This I think captures the spirit of the NP proposals and so far it doesn’t look as if this was in place in 2014 when Liam was killed.

      Lets not play politics with this or any other child abuse case, no matter what others try to throw at us.

    112. Dan Huil says:

      @fracking

      What’s the latest news on the spread of polluted tap water across the USA? Fracking still potentially at fault?

    113. mike cassidy says:

      Could the snpbad element of this also be a ploy to deflect away attention from Fife Council – which I understand is in effect a Labour minority administration backed by the conservatives.

      I am certainly far too cynical to dismiss the idea that they are exploiting this as an early “retaliation in first” broadside in the local election campaign.

    114. HandandShrimp says:

      Shame the environment debate was hijacked for political theatre. The SNP have a moratorium on fracking until the science and interest group discussions are complete. The Minister is a sceptic and the indications are that the reports will not give an unequivocal green light, so fracking has no chance. Ineos know this which is why they have moved their people and equipment to England.

      It seems that the Tories and Labour are more interested in posturing than actually working. It will be a tedious 5 years from them. I expect the Greens to participate fully in the results of the fracking work streams next year and I expect they will come away happy and will have no need to talk of this day again.

    115. TD says:

      Grendel

      I agree that the tweet on its own is more of an issue. Such is the nature of tweeting as I understand it – sound-bites with no substance (I don’t do Twitter).

      However, my comments were directed at the article on the website with which I don’t have a problem. There are a multitude of legitimate reasons for the FM to refuse to answer a question and in this case it is that the matter is the subject of an inquiry. It would be quite improper of her to comment at this time and she says so in the article. Given that is her position, I think the article is reasonably fair.

      If we attack the BBC when they have not done anything wrong, are we not at risk of doing the same as they and the various shades of tories do when they shriek “SNP Bad”? Are we doing “BBC Bad”?

    116. crazycat says:

      @ Dr Jim at 5.14

      What matters about people is what goes on inside their heads, not what clothes they wear.

      What goes on inside Andy Wightman’s head is, in my opinion, many orders of magnitude better than what goes on inside the heads of Adam Tomkins, Jackson Carlaw and Alex Johnstone (to name but three), all of whom doubtless have beautifully-cut suits and gloriously shiny ties.

      That doesn’t mean I think Andy Wightman’s perfect. No-one’s perfect; not him, not you, and certainly not me.

    117. Rock says:

      They don’t want the vulnerable protected.

      It is in their interests to have a vulnerable population they can easily manipulate.

    118. Thepnr says:

      Who would be a social worker specialising in child protection in Scotland or anywhere for that matter?

      I very much doubt I could be up to the job, much of what they see and face every week must be heartbreaking. Of course I’m sure there are guidelines and procedures in place which are followed to the best of their ability.

      None of that seems to matter, the reality I think is that intervention of social workers when necessary potentially save many lives of children every year.

      Other than removing vulnerable children from their homes immediately an issue is identified within a family, what else could offer complete protection.

      The people that do this difficult job walk a thin line most days of their entire career.

      Society failed this child as it has failed others in the past, all we can do is try our best to eradicate such failings. The system obviously has faults, the Named Person act is an attempt to try and tackle such failings.

      When something goes wrong we need to try harder to get it right, not just give it up as a lost cause.

    119. Rock says:

      “But what we know for sure is that anyone jumping the gun on them in an attempt to use this horrible, shocking, avoidable tragedy for political gain or to sell newspapers should be treated as the loathsome filth they are.”

      Davidson is the most disgusting and dishonest politician in Scotland in my view.

    120. Paula Rose says:

      Re fracking have a read of this by fellow Winger Simone

      https://mewsingoutloud.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/its-a-trap/

    121. Robert Peffers says:

      @call me dave says: 1 June, 2016 at 6:55 pm:

      “The SNP abstained on all amendments calling for a ban, clearing the way for Labour’s wrecking amendment and effectively making an outright ban the official will of the parliament.

      https://archive.is/r93rt

      An absolutely brilliant political move by the SNP and none of the opposition parties saw it coming till it hit them.

      It was clearly stated by the SNP SG when they brought in the fracking moratorium that they did not want to impose an outright ban as this could have been challenged in both UK legal systems and by EU rules.

      The moratorium itself was a brilliant move as it effectively barred fracking but remained within all EU directives.

      No one could thus argue they breached the rules unless they could prove racking was indeed perfectly safe and could cause no bad side effects and the history of fracking in just the USA alone has many thousands of instances of bad effects.

      There could be no forcing the SG to lift the moratorium or speed up their investigations as there has always been contention over the safety of fracking among the scientific community.

      Now, by abstaining, they cannot be accused of breaking the rules – they are, after all a government with no overall majority. (and one made to seem without a majority at all by the corrupt United Kingdom media and the Unionist parties).

      One could be forgiven for believing the Tories had won the Scottish election going on MSM and broadcasters claims.

      So now the opposition are going to be the bad guys if the Fracking Companies take any legal action. Brilliant! Absolutely Brilliant!

      I watched the debate on Holyrood TV and I’m still laughing now at 20:45.

    122. Effijy says:

      There is no Named Person in this case as Fife Labour Council would be aware of it and they would leak the story like a sive.

      They even admitted that no NP was in place, but Ruthie Krankie and BUM need the make believe headline.

      Fife Council said the system it had in place at the time of two-year-old Liam’s death in March 2014 was not the same as the named persons legislation which will come into force Scotland-wide.

      The Media, that is the same people who were behind Phone Hacking and the Milly Dowler incident where THEY subjected her poor family to the false hope that she was alive and reading her own text messages.

      These guys are the sum of the earth and the only thing beneath they are their paymasters.

      Another group who avoided justice en mass

    123. DerekM says:

      I went away out mad as hell about this and i still am ,i am not mad at the SNPbad i am mad at this was allowed to happen again under yoon law and order.

      These morons are not fit for office or job,heads need to roll and a full public enquiry needs to happen now into this council.

      And since we cant rely on the backstabbing two faced lying propaganda merchants in the BUM we need to make this loud and clear to our parliaments i suggest everybody write a letter to their MP and to their MSP this cant wait until 2017 no sir it can not!

      Get those pens scribbling yessers.

    124. TD says:

      Thepnr

      You are right – being a social worker is pretty tough. My partner is a social worker – not in children and families but in mental health. People suffering mental illness can be just as vulnerable as children and there is the added complication of some of the patients being a risk to the public.

      A common theme in all areas of social work is the increasing use of unqualified workers to do work which was previously carried out by qualified workers. Many unqualified workers do excellent work, but there are some situations where the training and knowledge that goes with obtaining a degree and post-graduate diploma are essential. Too many local authorities are trying to save money by using unqualified, unregistered workers who cannot be held to account by the SSSC (the social work regulator in Scotland). So the standard of work suffers and in children and families this can mean a child dies. In mental health it can mean suicide or murder – quite literally. I don’t know if this has been the problem in Fife – but it could happen anywhere. Even some senior social work managers in my area are unqualified.

      We have to ask ourselves as a society if social work is something that we want to take seriously. My view is that at present we do not take it seriously and the standard of service is below what it should be – despite the sometimes heroic efforts of individual workers. As always, underfunding is part of the problem, but it is more than that. We need to decide – is this an area of work which we want to make a priority? Do we want to attract the most able people into the social work profession? If so, how are we going to do that?

      Currently, morale in all branches of social work is very low. That’s not surprising when you consider that the money is crap, the service is underfunded, most workers spend at least half their time form filling and ticking boxes to cover both their own a**es and the corporate a**e of the local authority. Oh and if that isn’t bad enough from time to time you will be blamed when something goes wrong.

      Incidentally, there will be an upsurge in children being taken into care for the next year or two. Social workers will be terrified of being the case worker for another child who dies, so they will err on the side of removing the child. Then, after a while, the howls of protest from parents who have had their children unjustifiably removed, together with the ever-present budgetary constraints will kick in and the numbers of children removed will revert to the norm. We need to find a better way of dealing with these problems.

      Until we change the way we view social work and the people who work in it, we can expect the same outcomes. Which means that every now and again, there will be another Liam.

    125. TD says:

      Meant to say – the named person legislation is an attempt to do something different. I’m not expert in the field, but as a lay person it seems to me to make sense and as I understand it, the people who are experts support it. So worth a try I would say.

    126. Petra says:

      @ Robert Peffers says at 6:29 pm …. ”It doesn’t need the young person to approach the named person. For example if a parent, relative, nursery staff, hospital, GP or nurse suspect a child is being abused then they can contact a named person who will call in the correct authorities but more importantly the NP will assure that, as in the case of wee Liam Fee, the case does not, “Slip through the Radar”.”

      Spot on Robert. A named person would have ‘kept on top of this’. Not to say that Liam wouldn’t have been murdered anyway as it only takes a split second to end someone’s life however his chance of survival, over a 12 month period of horrendous abuse, would have been, statistically, much higher.

      A number of witnesses, even those visting the home, also stated that they hadn’t seen Liam’s face in months due to him either being left in a room out of sight or having his face covered with a blanket, even in public. When questioned about this the monsters said it was because he was autistic (settled him). Now for starters any named person worth their salt would have queried this by asking when he was diagnosed and by whom. They would then have followed this up by discussing this ‘diagnosis’ with social services and eh would probably have asked to see his face or lifted the blanket back to have a look. Tragic.

      Now it seems that the childminder Heather Farmer; her friend; a Patricia Smith who knew the monsters; nursery staff and child health expert Dr Jennifer Fusaro, who found Liam had 15 different injuries, all reported their concerns to social services. GP Dr Niall Garvey also wrote to social services to say that alarm bells were ringing for the safety of Liam after hearing of injuries sustained by another boy in the home.

      Giving evidence during the trial Fife’s social work manager Karen Peddar stated that Liam had gone off the radar due to one of her officials going on sick leave.

      Now note this. She said ”that’s a procedural thing we have to look at”. Beggars belief.

      And this. ”Despite being known to social workers Liam was NEVER added to the Councils ”at risk” register.

      If the latter two comments are correct I’m now in a state of total despair. And just to add wouldn’t a named person have queried why he wasn’t on the at risk register, better still why social services were leaving him in his ‘parents’ care at all?

    127. Thepnr says:

      @TD

      Thanks for that reply, I think you get to the crux of the matter. How highly do we value our social workers and are we willing to pay for the very best.

      Like an awful lot of things it seems funding plays a very large part. The money available to any Scottish government is of course limited, education and the NHS are at the top of the list, social work not so much.

      As always, there are no easy answers.

    128. Dr Jim says:

      @crazycat

      You’re absolutely correct, what goes on inside your head doesn’t count it’s what goes on inside the heads of others who’s respect this parliament needs and dressing up like a cockney barra boy isn’t the way to go about gaining it now is it

      And whether I’m perfect or not is hardly pertinent to the comment I’m not a member of parliament representing my country I just pay his wages and the seat he sits in as a reflection of me and my nation

      Also what goes on inside his head will be of no interest to anyone, if he doesn’t respect how he appears why would he expect others to respect him

      Whether we like it or not there are certain codes in life we all have to follow and appropriateness for a position is one of them
      Especially if the rest of us is paying for it

      Since I made the original comment, as if by magic Mr Wightmans attire is being addressed so lets see what he turns up tomorrow as

      Looks like I wasn’t the only one

    129. Provost Sludden says:

      Anuerin Bevan once said that the Tories were lower than vermin. Ruthie seems to have proved him right.

    130. Robert Peffers says:

      @Thepnr says: 1 June, 2016 at 9:32 pm:

      “As always, there are no easy answers”

      Perhaps not, Thepnr, but there is an answer and it is called Scottish Independence. It may not be easy to achieve not guaranteed to solve the problems but way back when the Treaty of Union was being signed there was a saying in old Edinburgh. I cannot remember the exact Lallans saying but it was along the lines of,
      :-

      “Wi oor ain pairliament wi cud stane oor MPs if they didn’t dae whit wi wantit. Hoo kin wi throw stains noo tae Lunnon?”

    131. davidb says:

      @ Robert P 8:59

      But if a ban is legislated its not the opposition who will be footing the legal bill of a challenge. Perhaps if legislation were introduced such that any legal consequences are borne by them it could be construed as brilliant.

      Legal defences and fines cost money. Taxpayers are on the hook.

      The SNP may well have been correct politically, but the opposition have exercised power without responsibility. They do not suffer the financial cost of their actions.

    132. Returnofthemac says:

      Yet another example of the meeja and Ruthie this time using the tragic death of Liam to score political points. Like some other ‘Wingers’ I hope the first minister takes Ruthie apart tomorrow in Holyrood. Shameful, utterly shameful.

    133. Albaman says:

      This is defiantly O/T, but I’m curious in that today, I noticed on “Flightradar24″ a de Havilland twin otter leaving Glasgow airport flying to Sumburgh in the Shetland Isles, what caught my eye was what was printed on the side of the aircraft, ie= ” WWW, SHETLAND.GOV.UK”, and on the tail-plane was not the Saltire, but a white vertical cross, against a blue background.
      I’m sure it must be within the law, but as its the land of Alistair Carmichael, and Tavish Scott it would not surprise me it thier sticky fingers were involved.
      (I’m sure some of the posters on here will know the answers)

    134. HandandShrimp says:

      Caesar!man

      That is the Shetland flag – Scottish colours and Nordic cross

    135. Callum says:

      Caesar!man: that’s the twin otter service to Tingwall http://www.shetland.gov.uk/transport/internal_air.asp

    136. geeo says:

      There is a labour twat demanding that the SNP should “accept the will of the Scottish Parliament”.

      Surely better to listen to the will of the Scottish PEOPLE….!

      The folk who looked at every parties position on fracking and voted accordingly.

      Hmmm…labour being labour yet again….will they never learn.

    137. Robert Peffers says:

      @davidb says:1 June, 2016 at 9:58 pm:

      “But if a ban is legislated its not the opposition who will be footing the legal bill of a challenge. Perhaps if legislation were introduced such that any legal consequences are borne by them it could be construed as brilliant.”

      Ah! Davidb, I see you don’t get the implications.

      In the first place the motion by Ms Cunningham was not about the actual moratorium against fracking which is existing legislation. so I resume that the moratorium will remain in place.

      Here’s a link to the actual video of the motion in the chamber today:-

      It is about, “Taking Scotland Forward”.

      The legislation for the Moratorium is already in place.

      The opposition amendments today only affects the motion, “Taking Scotland Forward”, which is not the Fracking Moratorium.

      “The SNP may well have been correct politically”

      They obviously are.

      ” … but the opposition have exercised power without responsibility.”

      Well no they have not. They made an irresponsible amendment and the SNP are not involved in that amendment but the, “Taking Scotland Forward”, remains the reason for the Cunningham motion.

      “They do not suffer the financial cost of their actions.”

      Neither will the SNP or SG as they abstained from the amendment.

      Try viewing the actual Cunningham debate and you will get a better idea of what went on. In fact Ms Cunningham took an interruption asking about the safety of fracking.

      http://www.scottishparliament.tv/Archive/Index/187f1de8-5652-43f3-a60e-ee4c5ece1973?categoryId=0e09056e-d8c6-486f-b90e-76fa8c758214&parentCategoryClicked=False&pageNumber=0&orderByField=ScheduledStart&queryOrder=DESC

    138. mr thms says:

      O/T

      Fergus Ewing has announced that 84% of CAPs has been paid..

      The Scottish Government needs to have paid out 95% by the EU deadline of the 30th June to avoid penalties..

      A couple of weeks ago the figure stood at 80%..

      It’s not impossible..

      http://www.theyworkforyou.com/sp/?id=2016-05-31.1.0

    139. Albaman says:

      Gerry Parker @ 10:27pm,
      Aye, it’s was on the smallish side to be an “Twin Otter”, checked it out and yes, the “Islander” is still in production , what’s the legality of the WWW. Web site?.

    140. Phronesis says:

      Any serving politician who writes pithy comments on social media about a fatal child protection inquiry is only enlightening us on the limits of his or her knowledge and understanding- this individual appears to be very limited in this regard.

      If you are a representative of a political party that has a interest in widening the inequality divide with its austerity max and has a long heritage of promoting a low-wage economy, developing a precariat class dependent on in work benefits, increasing child poverty and essentially distinguishing between the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor in its ‘One Nation’ brand of Conservatism then it will be challenging to understand the new child welfare legislation that has been given royal assent in Scotland.

    141. Petra says:

      Over time I’ve lost count of the number of cases of abuse I’ve reported from patients in psychiatric hospitals to children with complex needs attending special school to the elderly living in their own home. Young, old …. physical, psychological and sexual abuse. There never seems to have been a time that I’ve not been involved in such a case to the point that my husband says that when I pass away my epitaph will read ‘Whistleblower and Loose Cannon’ and these four words probably do sum me up as I’ve spent my whole life, professionally and personally, attempting to protect the vulnerable. I could write a book, a veritable horror story in fact, about the cases I’ve encountered and it therefore goes without saying that my interest in this subject leads to following these types of ‘abusive’ cases very closely indeed, in particular those that involve paedophilia.

      This latest disgusting debacle involving Ruth Davidson trying to score points against the SNP, and in the process impacting on Nicola’s attempts to prevent abuse / protect the vulnerable, is par for the course with the Unionists.

      Not so long ago, February / March 2015, a report was released under the FOIA stating that a massive rise in child sex offences had been reported over the previous 4 years …. the figure had almost doubled and highlighted that more than 350 children were being raped every year. Outlining only ‘known’ cases of course …. tip of the ice-berg.

      The Unionists made a meal of it, as they do, and vociferously demanded that the SNP produce an urgent plan to deal with the situation (the Unionists of course had no plan). Now when I read this it really made my blood boil as the SNP, in particular Kenny McAskill, had been involved in trying to have the the Corroboration Law (Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill) abolished; that is corroborative evidence from two separate sources for a criminal conviction to succeed, such as an eye witness and DNA sample. A Law that’s stymied perpetrators being charged and locked up and the victims (especially children) receiving protection and justice in Scotland.

      And just to point out, Scotland is said to be the only country in the civilised world (other than the Netherlands) that utilises the centuries old rule that has been blamed for very low conviction rates in child abuse, rape and domestic violence cases, where it is more likely to be one persons word against anothers. It follows of course that this Law is not used in rUK (which is significant for us).

      Lord Carloway had been appointed to review the system and recommended that it should be abolished with safeguards put in place, such as increasing the majority of jurors who need to agree on a guilty verdict from 8 to 10. Consultations were carried out and overall this issue was debated for three whole years.

      Lord Carloway, maintained that the CL ”does not guard against miscarriages and is a barrier to obtaining justice for the victims of crimes committed in private or where no one else was there. The requirement for corroboration has failed Scotland. It was formulated in a different age before matters such as DNA and CCTV. Times have changed”.

      The Carloway Review sampled 141 sexual abuse cases and concluded that 67% would have been successfully prosecuted without corroboration. In real terms this related to approximately 94 individuals receiving justice and a number of sex offenders being convicted.

      Following the review Kenny McAskill was totally castigated, hounded by Rennie in particular, and then the following was reported ‘’The SNP’s controversial plan to abolish a historic safeguard in Scotland’s justice system was resting on a knife edge last night after Holyrood’s opposition parties agreed a secret strategy to block it. The Daily Telegraph can disclose that Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats will today make a joint effort to save the centuries-old rule of corroboration from being scrapped.” (Telegraph 26/02/2014).

      Willie Rennie stated that ”the way Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has handled attempts to abolish the centuries old legal safeguard is “crackers’’ (The Courier 17 Jan 2014).

      McAskill stated ”We expected that from the Tory Party: it is the Conservative and Unionist Party. We did not expect that from those who have had a lifetime of experience. We know that Labour members take their cue from Cameron and Osborne. I said that there seemed to be a parody in terms of Labour’s position with regard to Labour’s position on corroboration. Let us be clear it is only an excuse for Labour, which is selling out on its principles. We accept that that is the norm for the Conservative Party, but for years the Labour Party, especially under Johann Lamont, prided itself on tackling domestic abuse and addressing issues to do with sexual offences. Labour has sold its soul and is in danger of selling out the victims of crime. I commend the motion in my name.”

      Well the Unionists ‘secret strategy’ worked and the outdated Law wasn’t abolished. Another despicable example of the Unionists in Scotland point scoring to the detriment of thousands of Scottish children.

      Thanks to people like Davidson, Rennie and Lamont (at that time) Scotland continues to be an abusers haven in general…. a paedophiles haven …. and it’s no wonder the figures are rising. Children being abused at home say by a relative have no voice (and wont have if the Unionists now block named person) and many rUK paedophiles head to Scotland as they can basically get away with abusing our children in a way that they can’t do elsewhere. And I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this on here before but when I was studying ‘paedophile behaviour’ I had access to relative research data. The contents of one report stayed with me and that is that when the Police were searching for a particular paedophile on a Scottish beach they identified over 134 known paedophiles. Horrendous.

      The Unionists are absolutely destroying our Country in more ways than one. More than anything they just don’t care. They don’t care for Scotland, the Scots but more than anything our children …. our future …. and the corrupt media that supports their actions, and hide the hideous facts, should be hanging their heads in shame.

      RIP Liam Fee.

    142. Clootie says:

      @Peter A Bell
      “It is not often that I am at a loss for words. But I have been left speechless by the sickening opportunism of Ruth Davidson and others who have, with a callous glee that is utterly repugnant, pounced on this tragedy as a stick with which to beat the SNP administration.”

      You summed up my own thoughts perfectly.

    143. Petra says:

      @ Valerie says at 11:06 pm …. ”Jim Murphy crawls out from his crypt!!”

      http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/01/only-jewish-candidate-for-labour-nec-blocked-by-blairites-in-anti-semitism-witchhunt/

      I thought Jim Murphy had gone abroad Valerie? No I see that he’s still hanging around causing trouble akin to his behaviour when he was President of the NUS.

      ”That this House condemns the intolerant and dictatorial behaviour of the President of the National Union of Students, Mr Jim Murphy …….. ……………………whilst these methods are a common practice in dictatorships around the world, they are not acceptable behaviour from someone such as Mr Murphy who is putting himself forward as suitable for election to the House of Commons.’’

      Ken MacIntosh was in attendance. Mmmm. He should be careful of the company that he keeps.

    144. Petra says:

      Interesting times ahead for Labour controlled GCC. I heard today (yesterday now) that they haven’t forwarded the money provided by the SG / Nicola to the care companies in Glasgow which could lead to a number of them having to shut up shop and ‘hand’ their clients back to GCC.

      Also some wee (or big) ‘discrepancy’ relating to Commonwealth Games money … Mmmm!

    145. Dave Robb says:

      @td – This is close to where they debate should focus.

      I was a Guidance teacher, attended Children’s Hearings, and had many inter-disciplinary meetings with social workers. police, health agencies regarding policy and practice, and more particularly, individual cases. I retired from full-time work 10 years ago.

      The Social Workers were nearly always overwhelmed by their caseload, and had seldom the time to work in frequent contact with families and potential victims. If a keyworker was on holiday – or worse, went sick – that was it. The system could not cope.

      As resources were always scarce, too often management had to decide how to spread what little could be done, basically excluding some from more than token input and crossing fingers.

      No-one wanted this.

      Schoolteachers and nursery workers tended to see kids most days, so were seen as important to keep track of individuals. If kids didn’t attend, reporting that didn’t always lead to a response.

      If things got heavy, taking kids into care costs an absolute fortune, and was to be avoided. There was also an acceptance to maintain “family life”, even if it wasn’t brilliant. Input was often a hour a week, or even an hour a month.

      Some cases I found personally distressing and stressful as a teacher and as a person. I freely admit I could not cope with the demands placed on a social worker – at least most of my job was simpler and positive.

      Social workers with the most difficult cases are likely to “burn out” faced with constant irreconcilable demands.

      The mistakes made in this case were probably predictable and avoidable -if there was more funding, more staffing, and more explicit codes of practice.

      Having been informed – with colleagues – what was professionally expected of me as a teacher in terms of a duty of care at least 15 years ago I have no issue with NP proposals.

      I do have concerns about what happens when the NP tries to push for intervention from a system which is under-resourced.

      Any politician who attempts to spin this for party ends is a disgrace.

    146. Paula Rose says:

      Build bridges all of us – between different strands of Yes and to our fellow countryfolk, being independent is about looking after each other and being a voice in the world.

    147. Robert Peffers says:

      @Paula Rose says: 2 June, 2016 at 12:54 am:

      “Build bridges all of us – between different strands of Yes and to our fellow countryfolk, being independent is about looking after each other and being a voice in the world.”

      Aye! Lass, but when we build bridges we do not have tolls at the bridge ends.

      Others often do and those tolls demanded for use of the bridge are often not only exorbitant but mostly in a non-cash style.

      Those non-cash demands may well be unaffordable to our own self-esteem. To pay them would lower us to their very low level and we are in a non-overall majority government when tolls will undoubtedly be demanded for votes on motions.

    148. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Radio Scotland newspaper review at 6.18-ish, led with Daily Mail front page, and ‘backlash’ against NPA.

      Any casual listener will hear: ‘SNP’s NPA killed that wee lad.’

      Blatant.

    149. gerry parker says:

      Petra.
      And I am sure Mears will be standing in the sidelines waiting to take up the care work from them

    150. Famous15 says:

      On GMS John Swinney confirmed that there was no named person in place in that area of Labour Fife!

    151. galamcennalath says:

      Telegraph ..

      “Ruth Davidson has given notice to John Swinney and other high-profile Nationalists…”

      Those high profile Nationalists, that would be her bosses in London, Cameron, Osborne etc, I presume?

      I make a serious point. Why are the terms Nats / Nationalists synonymous with the SNP? I would class the Tories as far more nationalistic than the pro democracy activists standing up for Scotland and campaigning for Scottish self determination, by any measure.

      The Tories are the epitome of Nationalism. Ruth Davidson is a staunch totally committed nationalist.

      Sorry, wait a minute, the UK doesn’t do nationalism. Sometimes I think the London definition of nationalism is the strange desire to be anything other than English/British!

    152. Robert Peffers says:

      @gerry parker says: 2 June, 2016 at 8:06 am:

      >I>”And I am sure Mears will be standing in the sidelines waiting to take up the care work from them”

      If, as would seem to be the case, the “London Labour Party Accountancy Unit in Scotland’s”, long lived firm grasp upon the GCC ends in the next council elections then there will be a great deal of searching required to find where the bodies are buried.

      Many of these bodies are involved in the GCC, “Arm’s Length”, set-ups. These have GCC Councillors as paid for leaders and board members drawing over-large salaries, (and expenses), in addition to their GCC income and expenses.

      The shrill sound of overworked shredders will be a common sound around Glasgow in the run up to the council elections. Let us hope the Bar L has enough spare capacity to deal with the inevitable fall-out.

    153. Ken500 says:

      The 2nd rate rejects causing as much trouble as they can thanks to the (non) Green liars. They are absolutely disgusting. May 2017.

    154. Ken500 says:

      The Scottish Gov should bring in minimum pricing and the Leveson recommendations.

      Just let rejects try and vote down the OFA and the named person scheme. They will be even more despised.

      They would rather support Trident/illegal wars than support vulnerable children. There are aircraft carriers to bomb the Middle East to bits and no frigates to patrol the shores. Causing more children’s deaths.

      Osbourne has (deliberately) caused the decline in the Oil & Gas sector. With high taxation when the price had fallen. Losing thousands of jobs in Scotland. Losing £4Billion a year which could have been spent on essential services. The Tories no enterprise and high taxation.

      US Fracked Gas is being imported into Grangemouth and fracked in the rest othe UK. There is no separate distribution system. Gas was extracted in the Central belt from 1900’s to the 1965. When NS Oil and Gas came on stream. There is still Oil & Gas off the West coast. Except for Faslane, the Clyde would still be building boats. Liners, frigates, fishing and supply boats.

    155. Robert Peffers says:

      @galamcennalath says: 2 June, 2016 at 8:43 am:

      “Ruth Davidson has given notice to John Swinney and other high-profile Nationalists…”

      ” … Sorry, wait a minute, the UK doesn’t do nationalism. Sometimes I think the London definition of nationalism is the strange desire to be anything other than English/British!”

      Everyone knows there are two variations of, “Nationalism”, although one of them is actually not nationalism as such. It is really internationalism that hides under the guise of nationalism.

      For example the NAZI party of Germany named itself as the, “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”. It was neither Socialist nor nationalist. It was a dictatorship, anti-social and internationalist.

      Under Adolf Hitler they advocated Totalitarian Government, Territorial Expansion, Anti-Semitism, and Aryan supremacy.

      Now Totalitarianism with a despot leader is not socialism. Territorial Expansion is the opposite of nationalism and Anti-Semitism/Aryan Supremacy is certainly not socialism.

      In effect the NAZI aims were to take over all other nations as parts of Germany. That’s internationalism.

      The British Empire was almost exactly the same ethos and had in effect taken over the vast majority of the World as parts of the British Empire.

      True nationalism is when a single nation wants to free itself from the former internationalism and be free to run only its own affairs.

      The United Kingdom is an example of internationalism akin to NAZI style internationalism as it contains the four, longer established and well defined nations, of Scotland, (one of Europe’s oldest nations), Wales and Ireland and worse still it is run by Westminster by legislating for England under English Law, funding only England as The United Kingdom directly with United Kingdom funding but also deciding the level of funding for the other three nations.

      Never forget that they produced a document during the Scottish referendum that was claimed by the present mis-named, “Secretary of State for Scotland”, as “The Treaty of Union ‘Extinguished’, the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as The United Kingdom”.

      That is, without doubt, a definition of internationalism of the worst possible kind.

    156. Dr Jim says:

      BBC quotes nonentity online source as investigative “experts” to rubbish the Scottish government over Fracking
      In an interview with the “expert” they claim the SNP are in trouble over this story and then go on to tell us the bombshell that the SNP will continue to uphold their moratorium anyway

      “expert” quoted “The Ferret”

      Actual BBC airtime given over to this meaningless attempt at smear when they could have just said SNP Baad in the first place

      Nobody ever mentions the UKs granting of the licences in the first place, and nobody ever mentions the possible court action on overturning a UK Guv decision by the companies directly affected BY such a decision which would in effect hand those rights over to the Fracking companies

      Are the BBC Conservative Labour lib and Unionist party just hoping to get lucky or are they just THAT stupid

      Or am I, as an ordinary nobody completely misinformed and the BBC are smarter than me in which case I would be really sad and make me want to end my life, or can I sigh with relief that all’s right with the world and I’m going to be OK

    157. Smallaxe says:

      It only takes two people to have a child,
      but it takes a village to raise the child

    158. Fred says:

      @ Dr Jim, anent the “Dress Code”, I’m sure you’ll recall when the Greenleader himself, Patrick Harvie, used to turn up at Holyrood looking like Stig of the Dump. Prospects of power & influence however have doubtess brought about a sartorial transformation of his wee self into the present mannikin from Slater’s windae. I’m sure Andy will be similarly re-booted when he gets to meet the dukes?

    159. Davosa says:

      On the link above from BBBC if found this interesting post:-

      “The BBC has a long and proud history of defending, covering-up for and protecting paedophiles.”

      Well if you substitute The Establishment for BBC then you are near the truth.

    160. Chic McGregor says:

      Thanks for the link Robert.

      However it seems to say that what I surmised must be the case is actually what has been proposed.

      I was ‘lead’ only by my own rational faculty which thankfully seems to be in agreement with the government.

    161. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Robert Peffers @09:28 today said:

      Never forget that they produced a document during the Scottish referendum that was claimed by the present mis-named, “Secretary of State for Scotland”, as “The Treaty of Union ‘Extinguished’, the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as The United Kingdom”.

      I have to thank you, RP, for a link to that document in a much earlier thread. And having read it, if our colonial overlord did claim that very thing (I still have to verify that attribution, BTW, so any chapter-and-verse from anyone would be very welcome), he was definitely making fast-and-loose with the verité there.

      Annex A is a legal opinion requested by WM on the specific issue of whether rUK would be the natural successor to the UK in the event of Scottish indy, and spends some considerable effort in discussing the pro-s but also the con-s of that issue. It does not make Fluffy’s vile assertion. It posits it as a possible argument, then immediately dismisses it as irrelevant.

      More interestingly, it considers in some depth the potential historical parallels elsewhere around the world, and one particular case may just possibly have some relevance here after 23.June: Czechoslovakia. When that state split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it did so by mutual agreement of the two parties without a referendum.

      It is a very slim possibility, I concede, but in the event that the result of the coming referendum is an overall “remain”, but with England+Wales narrowly voting “leave” and being thwarted by Scotland, a situation could develop where Boris & Co (Cameron being toast), instead of just getting very pi**ed-off with the Scots, are instead willing to do a deal with the SG and agree to a parting of the ways. No indyref2, just “bye-bye” by mutual agreement.

      And in that situation, it is an independent Scotland that would be the natural successor to the UK’s EU membership!

    162. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Robert J. Sutherland.

      Your comment reads like a valid point. “Wait and see”, said the walrus.

    163. Robert Peffers says:

      @Robert J. Sutherland: 3 June, 2016 at 6:21 pm:

      Anent the Treaty of Union and the WM commissioned paper.

      There really are no, even similar, cases to the Treaty of Union 1706/7 anywhere in the World as far as I can see.

      In the first place the Union is, without doubt, a union of only two kingdoms and does not mention countries anywhere in either the actual Treaty nor in either, still independent, parliament’s Act of Union.

      The things that united were indeed kingdoms and the Kingdom of England was clearly a multi-country Kingdom in 1706/7 at the time of signing the treaty. See the 1284, “Statute of Rhuddlan”, and the 1542, “Crown or Ireland Act”. In both cases there was no treaty between equals just an annexation by the Monarchy of the Kingdom of England.

      Furthermore, “The Glorious Revolution”, of 1688 could have no relevance in Scotland as it happened before the Treaty of Union. Indeed, if it had been relevant, the Treaty would not have been required to form a United Kingdom.

      There certainly was no United Kingdom in 1603 – just two independent crowns on a single person’s head.

      That “Glorious Revolution”, did not do the most obvious thing. That is it did not make the three country Kingdom of England a republic.

      The obvious legal reason being the basic tenet of English law that state, “Once becoming sovereign a sovereign cannot renounce their sovereignty simply because they ARE sovereign”. (I paraphrase).

      Thus the three country Kingdom of England only became a, “Constitutional Monarchy”, by making it plain to William & Mary of Orange they either delegated their, “Divine Right of Kings”, sovereignty to the Parliament of England or they were not about to become monarchs of the Kingdom of England, That remains the situation until today.

      It is also the reason that Scottish Law remains independent, as does Scottish Education and Scottish Religion. The Monarch cannot head any Scottish church. It may also be why the Scottish Health Service remains independent too.

      There is the unique case of the United Kingdom as a unit. It is not a country and the actual Kingdom is legally only the Royal Realm which, incidentally, also includes the three Crown Dependencies that are NOT governed by, “Her Majesty’s United Kingdom Government”.

      Note, though, that It is The Royal Navy, The Royal Air Force and The Soldiers of the Queen. It is also, The Royal Mint and Her Majesty’s Customs & Excise and if charged by the police it is Joe Public Vs Her Majesty.

      The point being that The Westminster Establishment would have us believe that it is the Government’s when it suits the government but her Majesty’s by the laws of England.

      Furthermore, it is NOT either Britain or Great Britain it is, as it has been from 1 May 1707, “The United Kingdom”.

      That means the Status Quo Ante is without doubt legally a return to two independent Kingdoms if the actual Royal Realm of the United Kingdom divorces or it Remains a United Realm but Her Majesty’s Parliament of her United Kingdom divorces.

      Sorry it has, of necessity, been a long dry post.

    164. Zoran says:

      Apparently – “a lack of communication” is often the problem in these cases. How hard is it for someone to tell their superior – “my God this kid is in danger” and for that superior to say “my God you are right, we must do something about it”?



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top