The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The football under the carpet

Posted on May 03, 2016 by

During this election campaign, there’ve been the usual bouts of political sparring, the tit-for-tat point-scoring frenzy played out through a plethora of media. One particular battleground, though, had a special resonance for me – the “Named Person” scheme.


I’m a former “looked-after” child. I’ve suffered the abuse and neglect that this scheme is intended to help protect children from. Having scrutinised the details for myself, I fully support it.

Scottish Labour and the Lib Dems voted in favour of the Scottish Government’s proposals for the NP Scheme in 2014, while the Conservatives abstained. Yet just a few weeks before the election Kezia Dugdale performed a U-turn, calling the policy a “mess” and demanding it should be paused.

But child protection isn’t a political game, and those who choose to wilfully misinform and indulge in scaremongering tactics with such an important subject for the sake of petty party advantage are as far as I’m concerned engaging in nothing more than blatant opportunism of the most despicable kind.

Many children find themselves in the care of their local authority as I was – the vast majority of looked-after kids have become so for care and protection reasons. They’ll probably have experienced neglect or mental, physical, sexual or emotional abuse. To them the thought of a “state guardian” is not a derogatory sneer, as used by campaigners like No2NP, but a symbol of hope.


The NP scheme is not taking away the rights of parents to raise their children, but merely formalising measures already in place to try to help ensure children are protected from harm. And the uncomfortable truth is that most of that harm happens within the family home, from family members.

Nobody wants to talk about the abuse that comes from parents and relatives. I know because it happened to me years ago, and it’s still happening right now in homes up and down the country. When I was being neglected and abused as a child, teachers, neighbours, family friends all looked away. They heard the shouting from my house, they saw me walking to school in dirty clothes and they witnessed my mum’s many drunken rages in public.

Why didn’t I speak up as a child and tell an adult when Mum threw me downstairs because she was angry? Why didn’t I tell anyone when I felt frightened, hungry, lonely or hurt? Because I was ashamed and I felt isolated from an adult world that seemed to look away, with fleeting glances of occasional embarrassment or pity. I didn’t think any adults would listen to me and I feared the consequences of breaking the “what happens in this house” rule.

If I’d had a named person, a point of contact I trusted and whom I knew had to listen to me then I would without a doubt have opened up to them and perhaps prevented years of suffering in the privacy of my home. Those who want to play politics with the issue of child protection should perhaps give a thought to the children at the heart of this matter. Or they could just ask us.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

188 to “The football under the carpet”

  1. Macart says:

    ‘But child protection isn’t a political game, and those who choose to wilfully misinform and indulge in scaremongering tactics with such an important subject for the sake of petty party advantage are as far as I’m concerned engaging in nothing more than blatant opportunism of the most despicable kind.

    Very well said Donna and many thanks for this contribution.

  2. Peter Mirtitsch says:

    THANK you. It is very important that we get round all of the lies surrounding this. The information is readily available about what is involved, and even the costs. I have FB messaged my own MP and had prompt accurate responses.

    Even Patrick Harvie, last week criticised the Tories for misrepresenting the scheme, and scaremongering, and Labour for simply trying to use it to score points.

    The daft thing is, if you ask people what they KNOW about it, they oftne go quiet. and when you ask for THEIR suggestions, they go quiet, or suggest “more money”, without saying for WHAT, or better still make recommendations about getting the relevant people to do the work they are paid for, or talk to each other. They never wonder why I start laughing at that point.

  3. Johannah Buchan says:

    This should be compulsory reading.

  4. Robert Dickson says:

    As someone who has been in the position of having to remove kids to a place of safety, I totally agree with the sentiments in this piece.
    Nobody involved in child protection and welfare is eager to deprive kids of their families unless it is absolutely required to keep them safe.
    There is no Big Brother waiting to steal your weans away. It’s guff. The system already works this way…it is merely formalising things which happen just now.
    The political usage of this issue has been despicable….but the ignorance displayed by some journalists in particular is also disturbing

  5. Valerie says:

    Well said, and I really hope that those shrill critics, who have no experience or contact with the world of child neglect/abuse, will read this, and feel some shame.

    The way this item has been deliberately misrepresented has been nothing short of disgusting.

    Scotland is leading the way in child protection, and that’s something everyone should be proud of.

  6. mumsyhugs says:

    Wow – just wow Donna. This should be printed and shoved through every letterbox in the country. Succinct and to the point. As you say, children should not be used as a political football – they’ve suffered the real thing without adding to their misery.

    Thank you for sharing your story – and if it helps to keep even one child safer, then it will have been worth it.

    My every best wish to you.

  7. Donald MacKenzie says:

    Well done, Donna. As a former child protection officer with the remit of working across agencies within the multi-agency child protection committee structure, I could agree more with your view that the plans for a ‘Named Person’ should be fully supported.

    How many vulnerable children and young people have been asked for their view by those who write the sort of nonsense that’s in that article and other ‘do-gooders’ who think they have some knowledge of the needs of so many young people in our society. They haven’t a bloody clue and they’re not interested in finding out. That’s the real tragedy.

  8. Jim Graham says:

    Thank you Donna and shame on those politicians, journalists and editors that have tried to make political capital out of this. People should vote for what appears to be the one party that cares. #BothVotesSNP

  9. Fairliered says:

    Thanks for the article, Donna.
    As a Children’s Panel member, I agree with you 100%.

    I an disgusted that the SNPs political opponents are so hate filled that they use child protection as a political tool.

  10. winifred mccartney says:

    Well said – political point scoring over an issue like this is despicable – every labour and libdem voted for it and then fuelled anger among parents and carers using misinformation and project fear. We must remember most abuse, physical, mental, sexual happens in families and with people closest to us and it happens in all areas and all income groups. If NP saves one child from abuse of any kind it will be worth it.

  11. heedtracker says:

    I don’t understand why its Christian groups behind the ongoing High Court actions against “Named Person.” They lost first time too and now its in the appeal process.

  12. Capella says:

    Very brave Donna, and thanks for speaking up for abused children. I’ve felt guilt at not doing enough, not intervening in time, fearing the consequences of speaking up. The Named Person is someone empowered to listen and take action. Let’s support any move to help frightened children.

  13. Thank you for sharing with us. I understand where your coming from, ive seen it myself. It seems to me that the NP scheme will not only protect our children but will make our society stronger. Its sooo true that those whom should care have turned away at a moment of despair. The damage done to a child when there is no one to turn to is a damage in its own right that will dog a child right into adult hood. The days of sticks and stones and stand up and be a man are long gone. Parents need to get a grip in my opinion, and understand that as a child grow its the small things like Empathy that if they are not nurtured in the right way then later on its an issue that cannot be easily healed. I ask myself had i had a person whom would sit and listen, would i be who i am today and the answer is no, id be a very different person, id be a lot more positive about myself and others. I think the NP has been a long time coming and hopefully it will be a success and the many issues that are in society today the cycles will be broken.

  14. Nana says:

    Thank you Donna for this article.

    Meddling opportunistic politicians should hand their heads in shame.

  15. Ruglonian says:

    An exceptional piece that cuts through to the heart of the issue – congratulations Donna.

    The party-political point scoring on this issue is obscene.
    My experience is from the side of working under the child protection framework, and I echo the thoughts of Donald Mackenzie above!

  16. T.roz says:

    We’ll said Donna. This is exactly the kind of clear and sensible contribution that is needed.

  17. Gallus Effie says:

    It’s no news to anyone I suspect that I support the named person scheme as the parent of a now, adult, profoundly disabled son.

    Parenting is hard, I don’t think anyone will argue about that and it’s so much harder when your kid has multiple, chronic, rare difficulties. Not just the nuts and bolts of getting by day to day, but much of it is fighting “The System”. To have any sort of success, you have to have confidence by the bucketload, chutzpah and total persistence.

    The amount of stories I’ve heard and been part of over the years of how parents are fobbed off for services, equipment, therapy – oh how I LONGED for another adult on our side to stand up for us when we’d had enough of the queues, excuses, lies (sometimes) and BS about why the things we need for support can’t be supplied. Just being a mum carries no particular weight in these circumstances and your kid having a disability is not enough to guarantee you social work services help. It feels random as hell.

    In this day and age, I still have had to send my husband in as a last resort when I’m getting nowhere. Dads are “authoritative” but mums are “emotional”.

    The last example last summer was an 8-week and 22-person saga to get one worn out, unhygienic, hospital mattress replaced by another.

    Named person? Bring it on.

  18. Onwards says:

    “formalising measures already in place to try to help ensure children are protected from harm”

    That’s an important point. Teachers, nurses, health visitors already have a duty of care towards children.

    Do most people see them as ‘government spies’? Of course not.

    After seeing the legislation pass through the Scottish parliament unopposed, to now see Labour backtracking for electioneering purposes is a disgrace.

    I remember the tragic case of the toddler in Paisley, where the Sheriff found that a named person could have helped prevent it:

    Sheriff Anderson found: “Having determined that on the balance of probabilities neglect was a contributory factor, the following defects in the system contributed to Declan’s death.

    “There was no system in place whereby one of the agencies responsible for Declan’s well-being was in overall charge and there was no system whereby one named individual was responsible for coordinating all available information.

  19. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Donna Babington It takes courage to write that story, it should,nt be wasted.

    Share this story with your MSP people & the wider world.

    Many Thanks Donna.

  20. aldo_macb says:

    If you like this policy you can vote SNP, Green or Lib Dem. If you don’t like it you can vote UKIP or Tory.
    For a confused, ever changing view on this policy there is Scottish Labour.

  21. drawdeaddave says:

    Thank you for sharing your experiences Donna it is a very brave & unselfish thing you have just done & i know it will help others who have been or are in similar situations. The point you make on the political parties using NP legislation as a political point scoring football is a valid one, as none of the parties voted against the legislation at the time & have now u-turned on it, the only reasonable conclusion that can be reached is it is politicking at its worse, especially as it involves such an important subject as our children’s safety & well-being..

  22. tartanarse says:


    We often try to bat away uncomfortable subjects on here with a bit of humour.

    This peice however serves to remind us of the serious nature of what the media and the unionist usual suspects are guilty of.

    That any adult can think looking after abused children is sinister clearly has something wrong with them. In fact, I would have to say that the position of the writer of that peice and his editor should be looked at.

    You have done kids a great service by writing this. Hopefully others will be encouraged to endorse this from a personal point of view, althought I imagine it isn’t an easy thing to do.

    Good on you.

  23. nodrog says:

    Donna please send this to The National and I am sure it will get printed. People need to hear your story as far and wide as possible. Many thanks for sharing it with us.

  24. Vronsky says:

    A very timely piece of common sense and (happily) less common experience. I had a wee dig into the backgrounds of the people behind NO2NP. Suggested topic for the Rev (one of them is much quoted on the fan club website of a bankrupt football club).

  25. galamcennalath says:

    Thanks, Donna!

    All I can think is saying is … what did Scotland do to deserve such opportunist scum passing themselves off as politicians?

  26. John says:

    Thank you Donna for your voice in this . I wish the professional voices had been louder when this was at the forefront of the election campaign . Tories , Labour and Libdems were wheeling it out at every opportunity , saying how they would change it , with hardly a voice defending it . Another child has been lost in dreadful circumstances who may have been saved if it hadn’t been for all the pussyfooting that has been going on around this proposal . Just hope these people and politicians can sleep at night .

  27. Legerwood says:

    Thank you for that very clear and moving account in support of this policy.

    I despair of the amount of ill-informed comment made about this policy by politicians on the make and journalists stirring the pot.

    Lord Pentland’s initial judgement after the judicial review on this policy could not have been clearer – the policy brings together what already exists and makes the lines of communication clearer for all. He also said that case made by the groups who asked for the judicial review was one of hyperbole and exaggeration.

    They appealed that judgement and lost and if they lose in the Supreme Court they will no doubt take it to the European Court on Human Rights.

  28. Westviews says:

    Thank you Donna for sharing your experience which should put these “politicians” using NP as a political football to shame.

    If any of them read this then I hope it will make them realise how much children in crisis need an adult who will do their best to help them.

    If it were possible I would go back in time so that I could give you a hug and assure you that someone was listening and cared enough to help.xx

  29. Lene Kruhoffer says:

    Having had a named person might have minimised a life time’s struggle (still ongoing as I type) of coming to terms with my own difficult childhood. My teachers suspected – it’s even hinted at in my grade books from so long ago – but like as happened with Donna, every one looked away in embarrassed silence. I get so angry – a mother of 5 children myself – when people misrepresent and cynically exploit people’s fears over this excellent and most vital piece of legislation.

  30. heedtracker says:

    Yesterday’s BBC r4 PM news has a powerful report on abuse of children. 35 minutes in, starts with an American abduction victim and child protection campaigner and then moves back to England. There is no mention of the proposed “Named Person” scheme but there is a lot on why no one actually got involved in the cases discussed.

  31. Bill McDermott says:

    Thank you Donna. I know one of the senior officers who developed the Highland pilot. He happens to be a very committed Christian, so it escapes me that the court case was raised by a Christian group when it was done from the best of motives and had numerous safeguards against the Big Brother scenario that they tried to paint.

    It reminded me of the complete lurch into la la land that is the evangelical republicans in America. Their hold on reality is in question when they can contemplate voting for Donald Trump or even Ted Cruz and keep insisting that Barak Obama is a closet Muslim with links to Jihadists.

  32. Robert Graham says:

    Well it really is shamefull if we the public dont listen to or support Donna and her recount of her experience , after all she has experienced it first hand we are only observers , for any political organisation to exploit this sorry to say is expected , it is said politicians are not trusted with this you wonder why ,
    best of luck donna .

  33. As the grandparent of 2 alienated grandson’s who’ve not been allowed to see their mother, sisters or us as grandparents I am all for this. But I’m a firm believer that more needs to be done to protect children in Scotland and o cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would not want the maximum protection in whatever way was possible for their child or grandchildren. It’s a sad day when child protection becomes a political football and is used mainly for point scoring. I went on a voluntary training course for GIRFEC so o could be correctly informed of what was being offered to Scottish children. I’m struggling to see how the Scottish Government will actually manage to implement this when local authorities like Perth znd Kinross Council refuse to even acknowledge that the UNCRC actually applies to them and was the basis for the foundation of GIRFEC. But good luck to the Scottish Government they’ll need it to deal with councils like PKC never mind parents and “others” who’d rather not see Scottish children protected. There will always be that element out there who only see “bad SNP” anyone who doesn’t want to protect their child – shame on you. You can see how we’ve had to fight all the way and 4 years on we’re still fighting to see our 2 grandson’s at

  34. orri says:

    There’s a balance between doing nothing and doing too much. It’s possible the Named Person Legislation goes in either direction. That’s up to a competent government to keep track of how it works in practice and modify as time goes on. An incompetent government will simply repeal with the avowed noble intention of introducing a different version of the same thing. A bit like the whole British Bill of Rights which seemingly requires complete abolition of our existing Human Rights laws before it can even see the light of day. In neither case do I trust the conservatives to do what they claim they will.

    That’s not to say the SNP have got it right. For instance there’s some justification in those who see the current move to actually inform the public of what it’s all about as some sign of panic. However it might also be said that their main complaint is that it might actually put an end to the propaganda campaign being waged via a gross distortion of what the Named Person legislation actually consists of. It might also point out that parents still have rights and prevent abuse from over zealous public employees. Said it elsewhere, if data about your child is online you have rights to see it as the child’s guardian and also any data held about you as a parent. Data Protection legislation still applies and can be used to have it amended.

    However that’s not the approach taken by those opposed to the legislation. They’d rather complain about it and use legal means to have it removed. I’ve a sneaking suspicion that if Davidson had her way she’d ride on a wave of anger that showed over 50% of Scotland’s parents were opposed to it (not electorate, parents) to invoke the “Supreme Court” and set a precedent where Holyrood’s law making is overridden from London.

    To be clear though, it’s the sign of a mature and responsible government that they do reconsider their legislation and amend it if needed. If the SNP do alter the legislation then no doubt there will be some who will point at that as a weakness. The trouble with that kind of attitude is you get the kind of dogmatic intransigence that led to the crash of Sterling during the Thatcher years. Hopefully the current NP legislation is just right. If not then it’s better than doing fuck all until someone comes up with a perfect solution.

  35. yesindyref2 says:

    I’ve gone both ways on this debate, and when I checked the legislation itself, and the last amendments debate, my conclusion is that it should go ahead, there should be no delay nor should it be suspended, but there needs to be work done on relatively small amendments.

    It comes down to guidelines on implementation mentioned in the last debates and the answer why amendments were not needed was that guidelines would be drawn up, but at that stage the guidelines by Ministers who are responsible ultimately for the way it’s implemented, didn’t exist, and that leaves a gap where over-zealous pursuit by the various authorities of perfectly “normal” parents and children could happen under the legislation itself. Which is not the actual purpose of the legislation.

    The answer is quite simple, the guidelines need to be published, and probably empowered via small amendments.

  36. Joemcg says:

    Sorry O/T Clootie and others on a previous thread regarding that BBC stitch up (what’s new?) maybe there was some sound manipulation but after the Rennie anti-democratic rant the cheer was the loudest for the whole hour. Rock star proportions. Nicola was visibly shocked and she looked at the audience in total amazement so they definitely rigged the actual audience.

  37. Kenny says:

    What a brave and wonderful article, Donna. Many thanks for writing it.

    To my mind, this law is one of the best pieces of legislation ever passed by the SNP. I agree with it 100%, which is not something I do with all SNP policies.

    A named person is a godsend to a child who is experiencing abuse and other troubles. Let us not forget that a child has virtually NO civic rights!

    Shame on any party that uses this law for trying to gain political points. Dugdale and Rennie — are you so utterly BANKRUPT that you have no other ways to attack the SNP?!?

    As for Ruth and the Daily Mail brigade, they are beyond contempt and devoid of any humanity.

  38. blackhack says:

    Totally in favour of the Named Person Scheme……I spent a number of years as a member of the children’s panel here in Scotland and abuse and neglect spans the whole social spectrum.
    I had to give it up eventually as I started “Taking it home with me” Horror stories that you wouldn’t believe.
    A lot of the children I saw at meetings needed this type of intervention, Just a shame that it wasn’t there for some of those kids.

  39. yesindyref2 says:

    I agree with what you say.

    I think a problem is that the SNP see an issue and want to do something about it. They get input from charities and panels and cildrens organisations who see and handle the problems, and decide to bring in legislation, and go full ahead, blinker fashion. There’s children with problems not being taken care of, put in a single point of contact to make all things possible.

    What they don’t do is consider properly the majority where there is no problem, and hence they leave the legislation itself open to abuse because of a small failure to have enough safeguards to cover the innocent majority from being adversely protected, even if that’s unlikely to happen. It still needs to be covered in the legislation itself.

  40. Vic says:

    This is such a moving commentary it brings tears of pride that I know my fellow countrymen and women share the values I have regarding the welfare of children. As a teacher I’ve encountered the unfortunate victims of life and society and knowing now that there will proper formalised protection that isn’t hidden from view but held open for those who need it makes me proud of the Scottish people for choosing a government unafraid of challenging get this very British stiff upper lip attitude towards bringing up children. All Tis gung hon macho nonsense of days go with by promoted by the right wing media needs to be fought and beaten to build a better fairer society for all, especially those without the means to protect themselves.

  41. Robert Peffers says:

    @ Donna Babington says :3 May 2016:
    ” … I didn’t think any adults would listen to me and I feared the consequences of breaking the “what happens in this house” rule”.

    That is one great truth the detractors of the scheme seem to ignore. It happens too as regards the institutional abuse that has come to light of more recent years.

    Why has no one believed the youngsters abused in local authority care in the past?

  42. Gary45% says:

    Many thanks for posting this.

    The wife and I were out leafleting last week and my wife was approached by a very polite but obvious Yoon paper reader, and he seemed quite irate at the SNPs Named Person policy.
    My wife tried her best to reassure him to actual facts of the policy.
    We were out again last night, and she went out of her way with a printed copy of the policy from the Scottish Government site.
    As the man was presented with the facts (rather than the BLATTANT LIES produced by the establishment),we can only hope another (all be it one citizen) has had his eyes opened to the bias from the media. All we can do is keep chipping away.
    “At one time who would have thought they would see the Berlin wall coming down?”

  43. Davie Cheekwind says:

    Thanks for being able to tell your story and explain to everyone how a young person feels and how Named Person is so important. I agree with you all the way and hope your life is better now and that you have some happiness.

  44. proudscot says:

    One of the first things the new (hopefully SNP) Government should do is mail a printed copy of Donna’s article to EVERY newspaper that sells copies in Scotland – and not just to the independence supporting National and Sunday Herald.

    Then at FMQs Nicola Sturgeon should read Donna’s article aloud, in answer to any of the Unionist party leaders who dares to attempt to use this issue of the Named Person Act as a political points scoring opportunity!

  45. Robert Dickson says:

    Unsurprising to see so many members of the Children’s Panels (as was I) writing in support of this article.
    We saw this stuff first hand and know that there is no conspiracy to be over-zealous, interfering tyrants.

  46. Kennedy says:

    The yoons are against it because it comes from the SNP.

    SNPbad! Why? Just because.

    Just because people trust them and believe the SNP have our best intrests at heart.

    What normal caring person would not want to protect children?

    Parents are not perfect. Some parents neglect their kids. Other parents damage their kids. Kids are not able to protect themselves and need help. Any policy that protects kids is surely good.

    The media are not doing their job. Paedo rings have been protected for decades possibly longer. When will this be exposed?

  47. Liz Hitschmann says:

    I agree with everything Donna has said and it is so wrong that political parties are playing with kids safety by pretending this is anything for the benefit of child protection.

    I look after 2 orphaned children (my grand children), although I am the grandmother both my partner and I were safety checked before we were allowed to take them and I have phone calls to check everything is ok a few times a year – I am happy that checks were carried out and am also happy for Social Services still to be involved, albeit by the occasional phone call as opposed to anything more intrusive.

    Children’s safety is more important than possible hurt feelings of a parent – this should be a way to ensure all agencies communicate with one another – something which does not currently happen.

  48. Proud Cybernat says:

    Hey Donna – this couldn’t have been an easy piece for you to write so you are to be commended for that. Really–well done. And, as others have already stated, it should be made compulsory reading for everyone who opposes the NP policy. When this is merely formalising what is largely already happening, I often wonder what those who shout and scream against it have to hide?

    Again–well done.

  49. Iain More says:

    The defenders of the kiddy fiddling predatory Brit Political Establishment chose to make it a political game.

    I had no opinion pro or anti about the NP Policy until the hysterical Brit Nat Press and Media started to attack it. I changed my mind and became very pro the NP Policy.

    I would go as far as to say that if this policy had been instigated by any Brit Nat Party and not the SNP SG then not a whisper of protest would have been raised against it and those who objected to it would have been trashed in the Brit Nat Press and Media. Mendacious is the Brit Nat.

    I would go even further and say that if this policy had been born in England by Brit Nats and not the Highlands of Scotland then again not a whisper of protest would have been raised against it. If it worked in the Highlands and apparently quite well for a decade then why not roll it out over the rest of Scotland and even the rest of the UK.

  50. Gary45% says:

    I think its time the SNP told the EBC northern branch to go and “Do One” when they are invited to take part in “obviously rigged” debates.
    The same goes to Radio Shortbread with their “Award winning quality journalists/reporters?????!!!!” WTF?
    The simple solution when they are being constantly interrupted whilst trying to answer a question is, politely say, Can I answer your question? if not, then just get up and leave the programme.
    Leaving egg on the faces of the presenters.
    I still haven’t found out what the point of a Wullie Rennie is?

  51. bobajock says:

    Thankyou Donna.

    This should never have become a political football, but the unionists seem to clutch at anything these days, and this issue seems to be the most misunderstood – or misrepresented as I see it.

    That you need to open up like this is simply why I despise the unionist cause. They belittle the plight of children by their actions.

  52. William Hunter says:

    I too was abused physically, verbally, psychologically and sexually by my mother. As I look back I don’t understand how the abuse was not discerned at school. I used to stink of shit in primary school. I remember the humiliation of being taken out of class by the janitor, having my trousers and underpants taken down to examine them because of the smell. I used to sit in the class crying, but not knowing why I was crying. Other weans would tell the teacher I was crying, and she would reply, “Just leave him alone”.I remember the handle of brushes being broken across my back and umbrellas being broken across my legs while my mother screamed, “ah’ll brek yir legs” When I was ten I tried to commit suicide by drinking a bottle of lotion I had to treat psoriasis.It tasted so bad I could not drink it. My mother caught me. Her first words were, Oh my, whit’l the neebors say”. She never took me to a doctor. Shortly after that I saw a drama on tv about a mother who treated her children similarly to how my mother treated me. The children were taken into care. I realised for the first time that I was abused, though I didn’t have the word “abused” to identify it. My reaction was to say to myself, “I mustn’t tell anybody, or I’ll be taken away”. Yet I often day dreamed that I was adopted by a loving couple.

    In spite of all the above, I don’t agree with the NP. The only intrusion that the government agencies should have into families should be in the interest of the family unit and the children especially. I think that teachers, leaders of social and church groups for children should be required to take training to discern abuse. I think that parents-to-be should receive training in child-care, and that they should be required to have a course on age appropriate child care every year until the child is 16. I think that spanking should be banned.

    There needs to be education and training for couples, hetero and same sex, on human relationships, and the treatment of children.

  53. Clootie says:

    Abuse is often “mental abuse”. Do parents have the right to demean or impact the confidence of a child to the extent it shapes the rest of their life. Who decides this?

    The LibDems and Labour true to form seized the opportunity to run a SNPbad story.
    Nobody knows when a child will be at risk. Young children have always been protected by health workers / Doctors / teachers / relatives / scout masters /neighbours. It is the duty of everyone in society.

    All the legislation did was take a moral duty and try to frame it in a legal guidance and attempt to close gaps that had failed kids in the past.

    “It couldn’t happen in my home” / “how dare you interfere in my parenting” / “”the state should not interfere”. The abusers may be a tiny minority but wouldn’t they make the same statements?

    I would rather make changes to legislation than have none in place. In reality 99.99 percent would have seen no change from the moral code application but what about the others?

    The Tories will oppose because the don’t care about society. Tories live in a world of self interest – others don’t matter. Their world is survival of the fittest. Look at their current policies if you have any doubt.

  54. gordoz says:

    Take it Revs seen the ‘Jonathan Rimmer’ Common Space broadside about WoS ?

    Talk about timing ?

    Some real morons getting airtime on a website that promised so

  55. Cuilean says:

    Thank you for your article Donna.

    On Friday, does Dugdale spin back in favour of ‘Named Person’?

    Abhorrent SLAB, just when you think they cannot sink any lower…

  56. Malky says:

    Essential reading for every citizen.

  57. tartanarse says:

    I don’t mind it when MSM mentions Wings (Rev probably would disagree).

    It might encourage some folk to see what the fuss is about. When they see that it isn’t full of swivel eyed nutcases and that what is said is backed up with facts, some of them might stick around and be persuaded by the truth.

  58. Irma says:

    I wish I’d had the courage when I was eight to tell someone that the janny used to take me into a cupboard at lunch break and kiss me. Thank god nothing worse happened but, even though my dad was a cop, I told no-one. I wish I’d had a named person at school who was on the lookout, but then again it might have been the primary seven teacher who used to feel up the girls who were lined up to go out the door. Still, better anyone than no-one, eh?

  59. East Neuker says:

    The Labour Party, and especially Ms Dugdale, are particularly culpable in this issue. They were involved in the creation of the policy, they voted for the legislation, they know that it is a codification of good practice.
    They have still decided to recant and/or deny all that, and join the deeply suspect opposition to nonexistent “interference” with with parental rights being falsely touted by some very suspect people indeed. They think there might be votes in it. I do hope they are wrong.
    As an ex Labour Party member it remindes me why I left. What a bunch of time serving opportunist ********. Jackie Baillie anyone?
    I am also a former professional worker with young people. This is fundamentally a good piece of legislation, which, if well implemented, could save lives.
    Respect and praise to the above contributor, well done in speaking out.
    The opposite to the Scottish Labour Party. How did it go so badly wrong? Where is your integrity? You had some once.

  60. Elgoldave says:

    A tough thing to write Donna. Let’s hope good comes of it. We certainly need to give the NP legislation a chance.

  61. Betty Boop says:


    This article has the authority of experience to explain the reason and need for the “named person” part of the legislation which any reasoning I have attempted does not when giving my opinion for supporting it. You have the respect of many here for having the courage to write this piece.

    @ Lene Kruhoffer, 4:11pm

    Thank you also, Lene, for your comments which further support Donna’s opinion. Respect to both of you.

  62. Returnofthemac says:

    Powerful article from Donna Babbington. Having spent 30 years in teaching I always considered myself an “unnamed” named person. I always thought it was part of my job that as well as teaching, the welfare of the pupil was paramount. Any potential issues were discussed with guidance staff, now known as pastoral care I believe. The health and wellbeing of our children should always come first.

  63. Graeme Borthwick says:

    This article explains the need for us to have our own Government. Our appalling problems can only be dealt with by ourselves. Throughout my long life, Scottish problems have been ignored by the rubbish that passed for government in London.
    Well done Donna.

  64. David Anderson says:

    Good article. I was brought up in a number of Scotland’s ‘care’ homes in the 1980s. Abuse of all sorts occurred frequently. One staff member was convicted of killing his wife and was known to be at it’, often there was an odd ambiance of acceptance from both children and adults and steering clear of the agressive and innapropriate adults was a ‘normal’ part of life. Whilst I did meet some truly caring adults it was often the case we were ‘looked after’ by underqualified staff in an environment of utter chaos. The memories I have are/would be shocking to many. At least seven friends of that time have since died from drugs/alcohol/murder/misadventure.

    I went on to become a Social Worker and have worked with children and adolescents in a number of settings,lately I have completed research into assissting looked after children to improve their educational attainment. This is not the case for many, only around 1% take the route I have whereas the majority are failed. This legislation does tighten up on a system already in place. It lays a name on ensuring certain obligations are met. As a social worker I would have made sure I was not letting anything slip past that was my responsibility and would certainly have flagged up any failure to do so by another. It is a heavily legislated area and Social Workers/care workers and the like are bound by that law and a professional code of conduct.

    There exists a huge amount of legislation and policy output around children and young people since the advent of the Scot Parliament. This is a good thing. Rights are around now that never existed in previous years and the focus has and will continue to improve things, I believe. Progress is slow though and big mistakes have been made. Not least the lack of care and attention to those children looked after whilst still being resident with their parents in houses and areas where they witness a range of negative behaviours and are subject to influence that is not geared towards their well-being.

    Therefore the caveat, and it is a big one, is, that without appropriate and targetted funding for research-based community interventions, things will continue to move too slowly for many children. For example, the needs of the poor attainers are many and dictate the focus must be across the board to include all contributary factors. In a word, poverty and all that word contains. Whilst the named person will ensure there is someone responsible for the child, it is fundamental to ensure that opportunities are tailored to the needs of the each child in need, looked after or not.

    I agree also the foccus on this as a political issue and the drive to spread uncertainty and fear is indicative of the sad nature of some in political and media circles in Scotland and beyond.

  65. Frank Mooney says:

    The best that I can say about this is OK, it’s worth a try. Having had to deal with various no brains within local gov, who are at the top of the tree in terms of child support, I fear the worst.

  66. Takeourblueback says:

    Round of applause Donna, amazing to tell this story and the hope that NP can bring.

    Playing politics with NP is unforgivable – the policy was brought up in the aftermath of Baby P to ensure nothing like that can happen in Scotland, here’s hoping it succeeds!

  67. This is as clear as anyone could possibly make the case for a named person scheme. How dare people play politics with this at the expense of protecting vulnerable children. Thanks for sharing Donna.

  68. Anne Gorman says:

    Thank you for this Donna. As a teacher I’m sick of trying to explain this. I was so member of the children’s panel for 13 years and I was privy to some of the most horrendous abuse of children who were ‘lucky’ enough to be heard. However there were times when information failed to be shared appropriately. This scheme will ensure that information will come via a specific person who can pull all concerns together. Again thank you for sharing something so difficult and personal in order to demonstrate how important this is x

  69. Red Squirrel says:

    Should we have one person to contact for children who need additional support? Absolutely.

    Should this plan be in place for every child? I’m not so sure.

    In trying to make things simpler there is a risk we make them more complicated.

    Best I can say is that the intentions appear honourable but the practicalities are yet to be tested.

  70. old dearie says:

    I commend highly your courage to write this article. It should have a much wider audience. I am so sorry you had such a horrible experience without any support.

    You have also prompted comments from people on here whom I don’t think have posted before. Great to see so many of those who have been directly involved with child protection supporting the introduction of this law.

    Your story about being thrown downstairs reminded me of an episode many moons ago when a teacher colleague of mine had to bring a boy home from a residential trip because of serious misconduct. As he was taking him upstairs to his front door the boy’s younger brother was flung downstairs and passed my colleague in mid-air. It was an object lesson for us. Luckily my colleague took action which helped that family but we would never have known about the awful lives these children had if he had not witnessed the scene.

    Shame on the political opportunists.

    Thank you Donna

  71. louis.b.argyll says:

    And to think,
    People are looking to the BBC, to provide balanced reporting of facts, on this child protection issue, including whether there is a measure of party politics driving any actual concerns.

  72. East Neuker says:

    Frank Mooney at 5.51 –
    Are you prepared to give any sort of information about the actions of the “no brains?” Otherwise your contribution does not take the argument anywhere. Of course I don’t mean names or anything that breaches confidentiality, but “fearing the worst” without giving us an idea what you are talking about is unhelpful. Lots of us (me included) can be critical of management we have seen, but how does that, I your view, connect with this current discussion? It might be very informative. Give us your stuff, not your vague forebodings.

  73. velofello says:

    Named Person a mess, declares Kezia Dugdale, – does not fall within the criteria of constructive criticism. So why did she say it? Does political advantage holds greater sway with her than the protection of children and youth?

    And we witness her campaign projections, sitting amongst youngsters. She is silly, and a chancer.

  74. HandandShrimp says:

    This was a policy that went through unopposed. It had cross party support with only the Tories abstaining.

    It has earned the ire of some religious groups, which is somewhat ironic given the bad press religious groups have had in this area Subsequently a handful of journalists and a libertarian sociologist (who to be fair objects to almost all legislation) have used it as an opportunity to create an SNPbad scare story.

    So much so unremarkable. What is remarkable is Kezia and others who voted for this to throw the idea under a bus for cheap political points. (I don’t count Ruth in this because I would expect nothing less from the Conservatives.) That does shock me.

    After the election I can’t see Kezia saying much of anything about this apart from perhaps “we have secured amendments, we back it again”.

  75. louis.b.argyll says:

    My GP (or insert alternative) signed my passport.
    He is my named person for I.D. or consular purposes.

    I would expect my local surgery to pass on contacts/liaise with folks back home, should issues arise abroad.

    I wouldn’t expect my GP to babysit my children, but I would expect him to respect the wishes of a child’s named person, starting the process of helping a child/family.

  76. Legerwood says:


    This is not an ‘off the cuff’ piece of legislation on the part of the SNP.

    It’s origins go back at least 15 years and during that time under both the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Government it has been subject to extensive consultation, reviews, research and pilot schemes.

    I agree with your earlier point about guidelines and that was also referred to by Lord Pentland.

  77. Fred says:

    Opportunists opposing this should be ashamed of themselves. The present court case shows this is essential to protect weans.

  78. Almannysbunnet says:

    So is anyone in the mainstream media interested in what the named person act is really for. We know you journalist read this site. Has just one of you got an ounce of humanity left in you? Have any of you got the guts to print Donna’s story? It deserves to be heard by a wider audience. I won’t hold my breath.

    Donna thanks, and keep on posting, you will always find people who will listen to you on this site.

  79. Linda McFarlane says:

    Donna, thanks for sharing. I have high hopes for NP. I have two Autistic sons and I believe that NP would have helped me get them the help they needed.

    On a different note – I just met Nicola Sturgeon in Banchory.
    Wow! What a wonderful person. So proud to vote SNP X2.

  80. Ghillie says:

    Dear Donna,

    Thank you for stepping in with your experience and support for NP. I imagine that took courage.

    Now I feel so much more confident about defending this idea as a good one, and debunking the rotten twisted version being touted by the press just to score cheap points against the SNP.

    No amount of explaination or well writen policies could be as clear as the opinion of the very people who feel they could have benefited throughout their childhood and who can see how such a policy could be a lifeline for children now.

    Thank you Donna = )

  81. Gullane No 4 says:

    Good on you Donna, you have to ask the question… Why would anyone be against this proposal?

    I was having a wee laugh whilst listening to Call Kay this morning.
    Despite a dreadful agenda so close to an election, the callers I heard were all positive and if you listened carefully you could just about hear the steam coming out of the hosts ears.
    She also seemed to imply at every opportunity that all abusers were male. She clearly needs to do more research.

  82. Democracy Reborn says:

    The merits of the NP legislation were challenged by way of judicial review (The Christian Institute & Others -v- The Scottish Ministers [2015 CSIH 63]). There was full argument by both sides. The petitioners were wholly unsuccessful. The opinion of the current Lord President of the Court of Session, Lord Carloway (whilst he was Lord Justice Clerk) is worth repeating:-

    “[68] The mere creation of a named person, available to assist a child or parent, no more confuses or diminishes the legal role, duties and responsibilities of parents in relation to their children than the provision of social services or education generally. It has no effect whatsoever on the legal, moral or social relationships within the family. The assertion to the contrary, without any supporting basis, has the appearance of hyperbole.”

  83. tony O'neill says:

    Seams your not too popular on bella fb rev,you bad lol.

  84. Orri says:

    For my sins I’ve been watching the BBC news. Both the six o’clock and Reporting Scotland reporting on two different child deaths. At the same time it’s gonna kind of quiet on the No2NP front.

    The second one was notable for there being a report that may have prevented the death that didn’t go anywhere which it might have done if there’d been someone tasked with coordination. Same as there will be times when two or more people are needlessly duplicating efforts so whilst at first NP might seem to imply additional workload in practice it could actually result in less.

  85. Free Scotland says:

    Kezia on the dodgems, Willie Wonka playing crazy golf … Hardly surprising that Scotland treats them as a joke. Playground politics from a pair of no-hopers. And then there’s the tank commander trying to make herself look important, flying all over Scotland in a chopper, hoping to pick up the odd vote – unintentional joke there.

  86. sheena godley says:

    My husband and I have care of our grandsons ,although we have the support of social work ,the system is geared toward the mother who
    proclaims herself as a victim ,everytime I say no to her whatever the reason ( and it is always in the best interests of the children as opposed to their mother’s best interest ) we are dragged back to court to explain ourselves to various agencies . This is quite common amongst kinship carers .we are assumed to be wrestling to take control from parents because , obviously we are so determined to become parents in our retirement years that we would deprive a mother of her children ! ( sarcasm ). I welcome a more formalised way of doing things ,we don’t have to explain ourselves over and over and would no longer have the fear that our grandchildren will slip through the net . As far as I’m concerned , there is less to fear from this arrangement than the one we currently have . I live this every day ,most of those who oppose it do so idealogically. Try walking a mile in our shoes!!

  87. Effijy says:

    Thank you Donna for having the courage to share your very difficult experiences with us.

    Your story should be in the national newspapers however their only agenda is to keep the plebs in their place with lies and deceit.

    I include that imposter the National.
    They have shown their true colours that are deepened as we approach the elections.

    There are no impartial and objective journalists at these Rags.

  88. ArtyHetty says:

    Have shared this, thank you.

    For the three unionist parties to use this as a political attack on the SNP has been a disgrace. How low can they get.

    It is of course the responsibility of us all to report if we are ever in doubt and have evidence of, a child, or adult at risk of harm or injury at the hands of anyone caring for them, or otherwise.
    A difficult one I know, for fear of interfering but better safe than sorry.

  89. Tom says:

    Yes. I agree fully with this scheme and this is only one of several personal reasons i will be voting snp this week. Not because they are snp but because they show a conscience. Thank you Donna for speaking up and thank you Rev Stu for providing the platform.

  90. Marie Clark says:

    Well done Donna. That must have been hard for you to write and brave too.

    Why would anyone in their right mind be against this named person legislation. It went through our parliament in 2014 I believe, with the support of all but the tories. What’s the problem now?
    Nothing but political opportunism, they ought to hang their heads in shame. What absolutely vile people to peddle all this misinformation. Absolutely pathetic.

  91. DerekM says:

    Thank you Donna your voice should be heard loud and clear on this subject and so should anyone else who has been in this terrible position as a child.

    The named person project is a step in the right direction and should never be thought as an unflexible policy,it is just the start.

    But i too feel sick that our politicians have sunk so low thay they choose to use this to score political points,this is something everybody should get behind and drive forward for the good of the children of Scotland,surely that trumphs political party posturing.

    Well red/yellow yoons are you going to show you have a heart we know you dont have a brain because you keep doing what the blue tories want you to do.

    And lets make no mistake about that because that is exactly what has happened but of course the blue tories have distanced themselves from it so when the proverbial hits the fan it will be red and yellow yoons that cop the fallout,not the smartest bunch ever conceived.

    roll on indy so we can get rid of these dispicable neo liberals once and for all and be able to protect our children,something i might add westminster has failed miserably at.

  92. Conan the Librarian™ says:

    Thank you Donna. What can I say that already hasn’t been said. Well done indeed. I like your tweets too 🙂

  93. Orri says:

    Thing is that even the newspapers take pains to make it clear that their claim is that Stu claims the supporters were partly to blame. Not sure if that was always his opinion or a clarification or even if that was his final word at the time. This is where Twitter isn’t designed for complexity. In retrospect the question shouldn’t have been answered without an explanation of exactly what the questioner meant by had he changed his mind. For all we know, unlikely as it seems, he had but that wasn’t spread to the four winds as it didn’t suit the unionist agenda.

    Did the fans who came late have any responsibility. Perhaps but we don’t have neutral evidence either way. Regardless Stu has either a stubborn streak a mile wide or is borderline autistic. Ask him if the fans, or at least some of them, had so responsibility and he might just give a yes/no answer than get into scales and degrees.

    Even if they did there’s far more blame with the police, the FA, the local council, the TV company, the Westminster government of the day. Let’s not for get commercial interests had a lot to do with it. Let’s also not forget the continual pitch invasions, disruption and violence from sections of the fans of many more teams than just Liverpool that led to the catastrophic idea that barriers round the pitch were a solution.

    End of the day the police were meant to be in charge of crowd control. They monumentally failed in that and their management conspired to prevent any lessons from that failure being learned simply to avoid responsibility for their blunders.

  94. KenC says:

    Thank you so much for this Donna.

    I have heard a lot of badly informed nonsense concerning this issue. In future I will send any who blithely repeat the unionist line to your post.

    As with previous readers I have been utterly disgusted by the other parties’ attempt to use this as a weapon for political gain.

    Your fortitude puts these charlatans to shame.

    Bless you.

  95. Still Positive. says:

    Well done, Donna, and thank you for your bravery.

    As a retired teacher I, like other teachers, had a duty of care to every pupil.

    I have lost count of the number of times I have had to explain this to those worried about the negative press.

    Good luck in the future, Donna.

  96. Dal Riata says:

    Thanks a million, Donna, for writing this. It brought back some difficult memories…

    One night as we were just gabbing away in my flat, my good mate suddenly went quiet for a bit, then started crying, then sobbing… then absolutely screaming his head off. I was completely shocked, I hadn’t a clue what was going on.

    Then he turned to me and said, “I can’t take it any more! I’ve got to tell someone. You’re my good mate, so I’m going to tell you.”

    He then went on to tell me the most horrendous and vile story I had ever heard. I was so gobsmacked, I just listened as he told me his horror story.

    Up until the age of 12, he and his family had lived on a smallish farm well away from others. A man he knew as his ‘uncle’ would visit them every summer.

    I’m not going to go into detail, but this ‘uncle’ was a dirty, fucking heinous paedophile, who would take every advantage of the farm’s hiding places to commit his acts upon my friend – at the threat of death. He was told that if he ever said anything to his parents he would come back and kill him. That went on from when he was 6, all the way to 12 when my mate’s family left the farm and moved to a town.

    My friend said to me, “I wish I’d had someone I could have talked to about it. But I didn’t, only my parents and I know they wouldn’t have believed me. Anybody else. Just anybody!… And I would have told them. I would. I would’ve told them the truth! But I was stuck there, with that fucking beast every summer for 7 fucking years!”

    I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. This was one of my best mates here, telling me this… and I was the first person he had said anything to… And we were 25 years old!

    My mate, my good mate, died at the age of 48. He basically drank and smoked himself to death. I used to try to warn him off the fags, and especially the booze, but he didn’t want to stop. “It helps me to forget.” he would say…

    My mate was given a mentally painful, suffering death by that filthy paedophile. If he had had a Named Person to turn to, he could well have been alive today.

    Oh, and the paedophile scum? He died in his sleep at a good age never having had to face any kind of justice for his crimes…

  97. JGedd says:

    The heart aches for the little girl you were who had to suffer in silence. Thank you for writing of your experience though your memories must be painful.

    Like others, I would like this story of a real childhood lived in pain brought to the attention of those who would cynically use the Named Person legislation for political gain. All legislation has to be tested in the trying and this has already been trialled.

    I wonder when those who voted for this legislation decided that it was just plain wrong? Sounds a bit like a planned ambush organized as usual with the willing help of the media. ( A bit like the coup being planned for Jeremy Corbyn by Blairites on the back of manufactured outrage orchestrated with the connivance of the media.)

    ( Again, best wishes to you, Donna. You have obviously found your way despite everything. All honour to you for that achievement. )

  98. Wullie B says:

    The named person scheme has been in use in the highlands for past few years, I have five kids, and havent noiced any difference and believe me with my three oldest kids having problems in the education system, the council and social work have been great, in fact they have called the school out on a few occasions in panels where school rep has been caught out lying twice, so in my book its a great thing

  99. louis.b.argyll says:

    What’s Bella?
    What’s Facebook?
    I’m into history and politics.

  100. Frank Mooney says:

    @East Neuker. Why should those who currently head child services suddenly become better? When you take on a Council you also take on their Legal dept. It is not easy. Give NP a go. Absolutely. Do not expect miracles as the same people will be running it. Accountability of those current incumbents is needed.

  101. Papadox says:

    @orri 8:09pm

    I appear to have lost the thread regarding “The football under the carpet” is there some loose connection between your post and the topic of your thread. I am totally confused.
    Then again I am not the brightest button in the box.

  102. Joemcg says:

    Oh dear Stu is getting absolutely crucified over on Bella FB. He’s the “Katie Hopkins of the Indy movement!!” Liked that one! Ha ha ha!

  103. Albaman says:

    Free Scotland @ 7:24 pm.,
    Bet you that’s the only “chopper” the tank commander will see/exspierence for a long,long time!.

  104. Valerie says:

    @Dal Riata

    What an awful, horrendous story. More common than many would imagine, or admit to knowing about. I’m glad in a way that your friend could at least confide in you, but it must also weigh on you, but thank you for sharing.

  105. Jamie says:

    Named person will lead to more abuse rather than less. As resources are wasted on children who do not need monitoring, less resources will be there to help those in need. During a time of austerity there is no justification for this policy. Already abuses slip through the net, this policy by strecthing limited money will make the matter worse, simple maths really.

  106. scotspine says:


    Bella isn’t committed to Independence. Full stop.

  107. Effijy says:

    Many Thanks to those at WoS for their signatures on the petition for a Public Enquiry into Political Bias at the BBC.

    You have added 120 votes to the campaign over the last 2 days. We now have 89,104 signatures with a target of 100,000.

    90,000 is our next stepping stone, a number that would clearly show the EBC that the Public are sick of their misrepresentation.

    If you have a Mate in Highgate, a Friend in Lands’ End, or someone Know in San Francisco, please get them to sign up and post it to all of their social media acquaintances.

  108. Joemcg says:

    Scotspine-well that’s the first ever time I’ve perused it and I have to agree. Too many posters with “agendas” vote rise, vote green,nope. Nae danger.

  109. Robert Louis says:

    Excellent piece of writing. It nails the key point, child protection is NOT a political game.

    The frankly tawdry way in which Dugdale and Tory Ruth Davidson and SNP opponents have abused this issue is disgraceful.

  110. Robert Peffers says:

    @Gary45% says: 3 May, 2016 at 5:10 pm:

    ” … I still haven’t found out what the point of a Wullie Rennie is?”

    I think I told you the answer already, Garry. The point of a Wullie Rennie is the very top o his wee pointy heid.

  111. HandandShrimp says:

    I think Wings has been too critical of the tactical voting conundrum for some. There is also a long held tradition on the left of forgetting what the goal is and preferring to to go on a witch hunt to cleanse the movement of the politically incorrect. It isn’t compulsory but a tradition is a tradition and someone has to do it.

    I read a piece on Common Space. No idea who the author is most likely never will. It simply isn’t important.

  112. Capella says:

    @ Dal Riata
    Your friend had a terrible experience and no help from social services. But he did have a friend he could talk to and that was a ray of comfort in an otherwise bleak life.
    Would a named person have made a difference? I think so. Someone whose job it was to take responsibility and act is what’s needed.

  113. Dr Jim says:


    1. How do you know which child needs or doesn’t need looking after,
    2.The resources are already in place
    3.This policy is about utilisation and focus
    4.Your simple maths is exactly that

    On a personal note, I’m 67 years old,I don’t know how old you are but I’m betting younger so I’ll just say this

    Be grateful you never grew up when I did and received the wounds and scars I did and there was nobody to do a damn thing and we weren’t considered the poor folk

    There’s a well known saying “What happens if you do nothing”………Nothing

  114. Capella says:

    @ Nana – many thanks for the link to the David Malone presentation on TTIP and the Death of Democracy. Excellent video. Here’s the link again for anyone who missed it.

  115. heedtracker says:

    Jamie says:
    3 May, 2016 at 8:42 pm
    Named person will lead to more abuse rather than less.

    There are far more issues involved though. Donna’s had the courage to explain at least some of her experience but so much of the problems within families is not actually abuse but parents being unable to cope.

    Being unable to cope may lead to abusive behaviour but its probably difficult to get noticed in the day to day trials of life. It can still lead to many problems for children though, in later life in particular.

    Isn’t justifiable to try and act on the problems parents sometimes face alone?

    We have to sit and watch as BBC Scotland relentlessly pours derision on public services like the Scottish NHS but its really important to keep in mind that they are merely high paid professional attack propagandists, only trying to make you vote anyone but the SNP.

    No matter how you’re voting on Thursday, try to look beyond it all.

  116. scotspine says:

    There is only 1 way to Independence for Scotland. That’s SNP x 2.

    Publications, Blogs and Newspapers promoting
    Rise, Greens etc are agents of the Union.

    Vote for whoever the hell you like after Independence. For now, SNP x 2.

  117. One_Scot says:

    ‘The dilemma facing voters like me whose Labour roots run deeply and who also yearn for an Independent Scotland…We feel it might be safe once more to vote for a Scottish Labour Party which is beginning to arrange its priorities in the right order again’

    Kevin McKenna – The National

    You would be forgiven for thinking someone was taking the piss.

  118. dramfineday says:

    To Donna and the other contributers who have made this such a thoughtful but painful article to read…..many thanks

  119. It would indeed be a great day if Labour in Scotland decided for independence so I don’t understand One_Scot’s post

  120. Andrew McColl says:


    Not had time yet to even LOOK at this thread but got to post this now due to time restrictions.

    Apologies for some of the effin and jeffin that is coming, but I’m absolutely raging.

    I’ve just been watching something on BBC iPlayer (I know, I know) but it’s got me proper angry. The programme’s called Scotland: The Promised Land, and I think it’s only ep 3 (of 3) that’s still available for just a few more days. It’s a treatment of the history of Scotland before and after the first world war.

    And it’s bloody brilliant.

    I’ll do so more in depth work later trying to find out who produced it, wrote it, commissioned it but it’s EXACTLY what our national broadcaster should be doing. The narration is strongly supportive of the socialist bent of our history, and it’s totally surprised me. I’m beeling that I’ve just had an education in McDiarmid’s Montrose group. Beeling that my education in Glasgow never even touched this. Somehow I know all about the fucking Bloomsbury group, about nazi-sympathizing Londoners and every little detail about the Freud family – the way our culture has been kept from us, and we’ve not even been allowed to hear our ain sang is fucking disgraceful.

    This episode in deals with The Lauderisation of Scotland, Reith and the BBC – a perfect example of the way our culture has been massaged to aid the greater goal of the imperial master. It may seem to some a petty point, but it’s even wonderful to hear academic Scottish voices with fucking Scottish accents.

    I’m so fucking glad to be living in the time where knowledge of this imperial management is becoming widely known, and to see people (especially the young and the under-educated) getting more and more enlightened. Scotland is NOT going back in its red-deer and tartan covered Union box.

    SNPx2 to continue the awakening.

  121. HandandShrimp says:

    Jeremy Corbyn has told grassroots supporters that it was necessary for Labour to use social media to communicate with the public because rightwing media were censoring political debate in an unprecedented assault on the party.

    I found this a little ironic given the nature of the debate here on the Scottish media. Perhaps they will come to Wings to learn how to do it 🙂

  122. winifred mccartney says:

    If you yearn for an independent Scotland there really at the moment is only one way to vote:

    SNP X 2 and EU In

    The labour party has lost its way and has only anger and resentment at its heart at the moment. Well I certainly am angry too for all the generations of people in this country who trusted in them and have been used and abused by them in their lust for power.

  123. Dr Jim says:

    @One Scot

    It’s Kevin McKenna

    Poor Kevin’s always been a Labour Yoon who wants Independence up till the point where he’s going to get it and then gets the Yips…Buuuk Buk Buk Buuuk

    Thems ma chicken noises

  124. Robert Peffers says:

    @Dr Jim says: 3 May, 2016 at 9:18 pm:

    “1. How do you know which child needs or doesn’t need looking after,”

    He doesn’t – nobody does.

    I’m with you there Dr Jim.

    I first started doing volunteer work around Edinburgh aged 11. I have never stopped since and I’m 79 in less than a week. During that time I was a union rep for around 15 years officially I did the job many more years unofficially while the elected steward was more interested in pushing Labour Party policies.

    People tend to confide in me and it would amaze many here just how many totally unexpected people have been child abusers but yet never been convicted. Furthermore, station in life is no guide to abusers.

    They are drawn from all ages, sexes and walks of life. Right across all social levels but most of all it must be born in mind that by far the greatest proportion of children are abused by other family members.

    To attempt to belittle the NP legislation on the grounds of cost is disgusting. For heaven’s sake the UK is not a poor country. It is awash with hard cash. The problem is it is all in too few pockets.

    Those pockets belong to the greedy bastards giving themselves multi-million pound bonuses on top of their salaries, perks and then evading paying tax on it.

    Vote SNP twice to help get Scotland out of the vile UK and for our nation to become a fairer and more decent country.

  125. kevin walker says:

    thank you soooo much Donna Babington for telling your story and knowledge i know how hard that is being a foster carer, i so hope your great words do not fall on deaf ears thank you

  126. Kirsty says:

    Thanks so much for that, Donna. Very moving piece and absolutely had to be said. I can relate to much of what you say – I also had a very difficult childhood and spent a great deal of my adulthood trying to overcome it. I used to think I was in a minority but having read your piece and some of the comments I’m starting to realise, with a great deal of sadness, that it’s a much bigger club than any of us would wish it to be.

    I think it’s blindingly obvious that we need to do more to protect and nurture our children and young people. I’m really at a loss to understand why people are against this policy. I wish to God it’d be there when I was young. No one’s going to be kicking your door in at 3am arresting you because you haven’t washed up last night’s dinner dishes or (as per The Simpsons) put the toilet roll on the holder the wrong way. This is a voluntary scheme. I can’t understand why anyone would be against anything that could help the many children (from all sorts of socio-economic backgrounds) who desperately need help and have no one to turn to.

    I’ve never put a link on here before, so I hope this works. If you can see the link, and I’ve not right royally screwed it up, please read it – it’s a policy that could save a lot of lives, both literally and practically.

  127. Still Positive. says:

    Andrew McColl @ 10.03.

    Watched and enjoyed it. There is a prog on BBC2 on Tuesday at 9pm called ‘How Scotland Works’ – don’t know how many episodes but very enjoyable and interesting. Last week’s was amazing, this week’s interesting.

    All the things denied us growing up – because of the union.

    SNP x 2 and EU Remain.

  128. Orri says:

    The bit about Hillsborough is slightly of topic. Seems in the final days of an election campaign some would like to prematurely do the equivalent of what the unionists would like to think of as turning on the brown shirts. More like a combination of panic and an attempt at claiming more credit for what will hopefully be another SNP government.

    On the other hand there’s some link in all three situations. A Named Person is there to act as a contact and coordinator for the many people who share in the upbringing of a child to one extent or another. Hillsborough is partly about the insistence that only one organisation has sole responsibility for a situation. The whole suggestion about sending some to Coventry is a bid to take leadership of the eclectic anarchy that is the Yes movement.

  129. Calum McKay says:

    Donna it’s dirty politics by labour. I can understand how someone with your understanding of the topic must be very frustrated with both labour and tories!

    Tonight I am watching the news two alarming stories this policy may have averted, one in ScotlNd another in England.

    labour in Scotland hate the policy because it’s an SNP policy, if the tories in England had a similar policy, tories in Scotland would support it.

    Basically the opposition (excluding the Greens) in Scotland have no agenda except poisoning anything and everything, sadly this includes opposing brave, new and innovative policies on child protection.

    How low can a politician stoop, look no further than the leadership of labour and tories in Scotland acting on instruction from HQ in London and cheered on by the press and state broadcaster.

  130. Socrates MacSporran says:

    I have deliberately restrained myself from commenting on the abuse the Rev. has received as regards his comments re the Hillborough verdict.

    Of course,as the Rev made clear, the unfortunate 96 fans who died were blameless, but he is quite correct in his assertion that those Liverpool fans who arrived late and were let in free, played a part in the whole sorry mess.

    I cannot believe the jury found these late-arriving fans did not contribute to the disaster. It is well known, the Liverpool fans of the time had “form” when it came to bad behaviour.

    Leaving aside events at the Heysal – Liverpool fans had regularly proved extremely difficult to police. I recall, as early as 1965, when Liverpool played Celtic in the semi-final of the Cup-Winners Cup, being disturbed at the behaviour of the visiting Liverpool fans.

    I was speaking,after the verdict, to a retired senior police officer, who was himself at one time Match Commander at the ground of one of our major clubs. He confirmed, Match Commanders were well aware of the extra difficulties involved in policing Liverpool games, difficulties caused by the established behaviour of a section of the Liverpool support.

    Yes, South Yorkshire Police were far from blameless for what happened. Yes, many mistakes were made, but, once the shit hit the fan, the Establishment did what it always does and sought a convenient scapegoat.

    Chief Superintendent Duckenfield certainly did not cover himself in glory that day. He got things wrong, but, he was not alone. I doubt if he was senior enough in the police service to orchestrate the cover-up and deceptions for instance.

    He has been hung-out to dry by more-powerful shadowy figures. What about the Council who allowed the game to go-ahead at a ground without a current Safety Certificate? What about the FA, who took the game to that ground? Are they not to be brought to book for what happened?

  131. Joemcg says:

    Socrates I don’t doubt your insight into Liverpool fans behaviour but surely any teams support would have done the same that day. Latecomers impatient to get in to the ground pushing in. They were not to know the severe crush that was occurring. Think it could have been any club in the country the tragedy happened to.

  132. Albamac says:

    I read this comment under an article on Common Space.

    “I’ve read both articles, by Cath Sullivan and Laura Lee, and the readers’ comments that followed. All of it amounting to nothing more than the usual blah-blah-bullshit from people who talk about contracts, law, safety at ‘work’, social attitudes and ‘doing the right (or right-on) thing’.

    Their cool-headed and carefully crafted observations are typical of the mountains of text that can be generated by a microgram of experience.

    All are careful to omit any mention of the largest endangered group who have suffered the horrors of neglect, dirt, disease, social exclusion and every imaginable kind of abuse for generations without respite or help because, shunned by society, they had and have no voice.

    So, it looks like everyone is agreed that junkies and drunks who put themselves in danger for the sake of a fix or another shot of alcohol don’t have children. If they did, we’d have to contemplate the frightening possibility that dear old Mum is the worst thing that could have happened to them. Their long list of ‘uncles’ might include a few sexual predators but who’s to know and who would care? Best not, then, to mention children at all.

    My guess is that none of you has ever encountered a four-year-old girl, matted with muck and covered in sores, left alone in a single-end without heat, light or food. How about a weeping, ten-year-old boy, in similarly bleak surroundings and rigid with fear, clutching so hard at a slice of dry bread that his fingers had pierced it.

    Ever been asked for help by a twelve-year-old girl whose mother lay in a drunken stupor with the limp penis of an unconscious stranger draped over her leg, close to her still steaming vagina? Would that give any of you a sleepless night? It would, I suppose, if you were twelve and shared that bed with your mother.

    If you’re afraid to rock the boat, you cling to the myth of the ‘whore with the heart of gold’. The big question, we’re told, is whether or not soliciting should be a crime. I’m putting infanticide, physical violence, sexual abuse and neglect way above that on my list of evils directly attributed to the ‘work’ of good-time-girls who give a fuck for anyone but their children.

    Prostitution is neither a public service nor a social necessity. It’s a filthy business that has ruined the lives of countless innocent victims. Many of those have managed to rebuild their lives, with courage and commitment that wasn’t learned at their mothers’ knees, but dark memories prevail. It would take a great deal of that courage to write an article from that perspective. That’s, probably, why I’ve never read one.”

    All of the above prompted this single short response about the ‘industry’:

    “Thanks for those graphic mental images but I’m afraid they don’t prove anything.
    A woman who isn’t a prostitute can be a bad mother just as much as a prostitute can be a good mother. Currently it’s a filthy business because the law actively works against cleaning it up and making it safer for those involved. The oldest profession isn’t going to go away even if you do ban it. Banning it won’t make children safer, regulating it so that the people working in the industry might be able to get decent childcare might however.”

    Would there be any point in suggesting to this guy that you, really, had to be there or is it, after all, just an administrative problem?

  133. Thepnr says:

    Donna thanks for sharing your experience much of which resonates with me.

    I too spent more than a couple of years in childrens homes or with foster parents, in my case the abuse was deemed to be “neglect”.

    Neglect, that in my view was not caused by a mother trying to raise 5 children when the father was not there who had no choice other then to live on benefits that were inadequate to feed and clothe a family properly. The necessities never mind luxuries.

    If anything this neglect is on the increase, look at the rise in foodbanks as an example. It’s a disgrace.

    The real neglect was that of the state, who ignore even now people in similar circumstances. People look at children now who are hungry, badly clothed and with holes in their shoes. Too easily they can blame the parent or parents for neglect.

    The real culprit though of neglect in a society as rich as ours is the failure of the state to provide a safety net and to protect the most vulnerable when circumstances merit it. Maybe in my case an NP could have helped and I see this scheme as something that can only be for the betterment of disadvantaged children.

    Thanks again.

  134. heedtracker says:

    What about the Council who allowed the game to go-ahead at a ground without a current Safety Certificate? What about the FA, who took the game to that ground? Are they not to be brought to book for what happened?

    Why did all football grounds need huge fences round the pitch? to stop them killing each other with pitch invasions. Saw some medieval pitch battles at Wembley, Hampden, Ibrox, Parkhead back in the day. Its amazing it wasn’t a regular event.

    Why a lot of these business weren’t shut down is just one more teamGB mystery.

  135. Jim says:

    Radio Shortbread asked, “does child protection mesures do more harm than good?

    Why in fucks name is this even been debated along with named person?

    Get a disclosure Scotland, etc, etc and whatever else it takes to prove that a child is safe in your charge then get on with it.

    These checks are there to protect children, the clue is in the fucking name.

    If you have to jump through hoops to protect a child from harm then get jumping or don’t volunteer and shut the fuck up.

  136. Bilptoe says:

    A UKIP canvasser told me the audience in the recent BBC leaders debate was shipped-in LieDems from south of the border, anyone know if that’s true?

  137. K1 says:

    Thank you Donna, you speak for the many unborn as yet children who will have protection in our country, this policy will ensure that safe future for them.

  138. ronnie anderson says:

    Kevin McKenna It was pre ref that he was saying he was listening to his children & they,re knowledge of politics & were Independence minded , he must have stopped listening.

  139. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Kevin McKenna remains pro independence but not pro SNP

  140. Iain More says:

    My friend Michelle sends you a big hug Donna. She had a pretty brutal childhood as well and mostly at the hands of her father, her own mother turned a blind eye to it even though she knew what was going on. She relates to your story in a way that most of us cant because we got luckier than some with our parents and families.

  141. ronnie anderson says:


    How much was spent busing canvesers up from south of the border & the Mps & Lords visit to Scotland pre Referendem ???, no holding my breath.

  142. K1 says:

    Here’s that link from Ronnie:

    Archived in case it ‘disappears’ or is ‘altered’:

  143. ronnie anderson says:

    @ K1 thanks just came across it on F/B thought it relevent to post on Wings.

  144. call me dave says:

    Courageous article indeed. A compelling case for the NP initiative to be given a chance to work nation wide.

    Been away all day but since I came in I have read nearly every comment. Many excellent suggestions and past experiences noted.

    One day to the vote, it’s not in the bag by any means with siren voices vying for your list vote.

    SNP x 2

  145. Andrew Mclean says:

    I think what stands out for me is that this act was debated long and hard, by well paid politicians. In conjunction with professional child care professionals, and at its heart was a desire to better the lives of children, especially those at risk.
    And as soon as a extremist religious cult decided to take it to court the liar liberals and the incompetent labour ran for the hills.

    And that tells me that they are not fit to govern a country, sometimes it is necessary to do this right thing, regardless of the cost to the party, the SNP put the country first, the rest put their little party ahead of the country.

    Again and again we find only the SNP are fit to govern Scotland with commitment and with humility.
    Thank god for the SNP. With out them we would be in the clutches of a hopeless shower of incompetents unfit for public office. As was demonstrated by Ruth Davidson’s utterly pathetic ranting, twisted face rage and bouncing up an down like a demented caricature puppet. Kezia labours next in line for execution, after her complete fiasco of a manifesto launch, the contents of she completely is ignorant of!

  146. K. A. Mylchreest says:

    Trying to make political capital out of this issue is just about as low as you can stoop. May they get their just deserts, namely having their voters desert them, hopefully for good and all.

  147. G4jeepers says:

    Zany comedy apparently

  148. Dr Jim says:

    Is it not more likely that Kevin McKenna is just pro Kevin McKenna which would be OK if you were a postman or a mechanic but not a “Churnalist”

  149. yesindyref2 says:

    Kevin McKenna is Kevin McKenna. He might like to spin the odd yarn but I think he’s quite genuine. He stuck with Labour for year after year and finally broke as many many others did, and is now lost. No party reflects his beliefs, whereas in the past Labour did. Simple as that I think.

    He’s thinking about RISE, I’d be interested to know if he’d vote SSP if they were standing – or Labour for Independence. Or could he go into the ballot box, look furtively around him, blindfold and gag himself with nostril pads and put his X against the SNP? Who knows!

  150. mr thms says:


    Just been reading a old Labour motion from the last Scottish parliament about ’10 million mission voters’.

    A new method of registration was rushed in by the Westminster government due to concerns about voter fraud.

    In their motion, they say there are 230,000 voters missing from the electoral register in Scotland..

  151. bjsalba says:

    @Red Squirrel


    The process has been extensively tested.

    I live in Highland where it has been in place for several years.

  152. Andrew Mclean says:

    Of course the opposition to the name person act, that’s actually one small part of the act is yooon strategy

    “Which is why devolving responsibility for flammable subjects matters too. Like many ostensibly clever strategies this might prove too clever for its own good. Nevertheless, it is the best theory Unionists have right now. If the SNP are to fail, they must first disappoint the people. That means creating losers as well as winners. It means making choices and wrestling with real and often difficult problems and controversies. It means, if you like, giving the Scottish government sufficient rope with which to hang itself. That’s the theory, at any rate, even if there remains the possibility the SNP government might use that rope for something else.”

    After np what next? The unionists will shit their own nest rather than give credit to the SNP, and that will be their undoing!

  153. Morgatron says:

    Sarah Smith , political editor Scotlandshire article, do these people really hate Scotland? I wonder!

  154. mealer says:

    Many thanks to Donna Babington for this excellent piece.Prior to reading it,I was comfortable with NP.Now I appreciate more fully the necessity of NP.

  155. G. Campbell says:


    The keffiyah incites people to kill, claims the group campaigning against Sandra White in Glasgow Kelvin.

    Glasgow Friends of Israel: They don’t like it when their “symbol of Palestinian resistance” is appropriated for good rather than an encitement to kill.

    – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Glasgow Friends of Israel
    What did we Scots do to deserve Alex Salmond, George Galloway, Sandra White and the SPSC. To name but a few!!
    29 January at 04:55

    Iris Sandylands
    Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish & Israeli Jews = Brothers In Arms
    29 January at 07:52

    Iris Sandylands
    SNP = Scottish Nazi Party
    29 January at 07:42

    – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Current top post on the GFI facebook page:

    Happy Birthday to a very inspirational woman, Golda Meir!

    “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children.”

    Hmm. Not divisive at all.

  156. Phydaux says:

    Heartfelt thanks for this Donna.Your voice is rare and powerful and is crying out to be heard far and wide.

    The uncomfortable truth is that we all turned a blind eye.Nobody was looking out for you.Nobody was willing to intervene on your behalf.Nobody came to your rescue to prevent the suffering you endured.We let you down.The fact that you support NP speaks volumes about the need for it.

    Child abuse is a a significant problem in our society.Those who seek to make political capital out of it are deeply disrespectful to the vulnerable and troubled children in our midst who are not safe.

    I trust and hope that the NP is a step in the right direction.It is not a quick fix.There is no such thing.Until we all take much greater collective and individual responsibility for the safety of vulnerable children within our own community,we are unlikely to stop the tide.

    Thanks again.

  157. Bill says:

    Brave wee soul. Thanks.

  158. Dorothy Devine says:

    G.Campbell, so that is the source for the flier I received yesterday.

    They can hing as they grow -I’m a wee bittie fed up of folk taking offence at the drop of hat , faux outrage really gets my goat.

  159. O/T

    The cartoon in today’s Guardian is a classic

  160. galamcennalath says:

    Stirring article from WGD. Put me in a good mood for the day.

    “Dream the dream of the unicorn and you can learn how to hope, and once you’ve learned how to hope you can never forget the lesson. The flame dances within you and lights up the darkness. You’ll always dream of the unicorn because you’ve realised that there is a better way”

    Which is so true. Once you’ve seen what is possible, and got over fears, you don’t turn back.

  161. Valerie says:


    Anyone on Twitter should try and get this hashtag in. The silence by the media is deafening, apart from Channel 4.

    I just saw someone Tweet Angus Robertson asking him to raise it today.

  162. heedtracker says:

    Dave McEwan Hill says:
    4 May, 2016 at 9:10 am

    The cartoon in today’s Guardian is a classic

    As is The National front nanner headline, nothing to do with tomorrow’s election, Kevin MacKenna’s little whisper of Slabour love, down the side, “it might be safe to vote Labour again…”

    Who do you think you are kidding The National. If all these cunning stunts don’t work The National, you’re going to have some very angry RISE activists on your hands. They’re certainly roaring their heads off from their election vans this morning.

  163. NeoconNat says:

    I reached for the radio in the car today, with a day to go until the election, sure that Kaye and her callers would be excitedly discussing some political issue or another.

    As any one of the 3% who listen to her show will know, Kaye has been very enthusiastic in telling us what she thought of the parties and their policies over the last few weeks.

    Today the subject was panda breeding.

    Yesterday Kaye & BBC Scotland gave about an hour to RISE, Solidarity, and UKIP. That slot was followed with 30 minutes of an expert explaining the logic of splitting votes.

    Today, Panda breeding.

    With previous elections they twisted everything to suit Labour. Having realised that was flogging a dead horse, the new strategy is to play down the election, telling us it’s a foregone conclusion, or, if we do decide to vote for some silly sentimental reason, why not split your vote and create a beautiful rainbow of parties in parliament?

  164. Dan Huil says:

    The britnat establishment and britnat media must be challenged at every opportunity. Thank god for pro-indy sites like WOS.

  165. Clootie says:

    Terry Kelly has made it onto the Guido Fawkes site. It must have bee fun for the visiting HIS site….that should keep them going for a few days!

  166. Robert Peffers says:


    You just have to wonder at BBC Scotland and that daft old bat Kate Adams.

    We are on the verge of the Scottish Government elections and what is the topic of the day for Kaye?

    “Should Pandas be left alone and not be artificially inseminated.”

    The whole point of keeping Pandas in captivity is to prevent the species from extinction. They have joint problems with their natural habitat being eroded while their sole diet becomes an ever decreasing shorter supply.

    Together with their natural breeding problems it has made it essential to propagate the species in captivity or it will die off.

    So just what motives these, “Animal Welfare Charities”, have in essentially wanting to wipe out Giant Pandas from the Earth is somewhat doubtful.

    The BBC’s motive are quite clear, though. Just one more SNP BAD story and an all too obvious attempt to divert voters attention from a very important Scottish election.

    Never mind the PANDA breeding problem, folks. Just get out there to vote and make those Unionist parties find it as difficult to breed more Unionist MSPs as Giant Pandas have to make more Giant Pandas.

  167. call me dave says:

    ‘Pandering’ to the public apathy on ‘your call’ good old auntie.

    Zoo..ming this morning Kaye.

    Sarah Smith says if labour offered free Spanish holidays the voters would want to go to Portugal. 🙂


    Postal votes getting sifted through at Fife house this morning but reports say …not as many as expected to be placed in bundles to be counted with the main vote.

    Why? Don’t know, apathy I hope not, handing in your postal on the day,maybe.

    Use you vote folks.

    SNP x 2 for me.

  168. carjamtic says:


    Very brave,there are no words good enough,to express my admiration for someone who,in order to protect future generations of children,put themselves personally ‘in the line of fire’,I cannot give you a medal,but your are now on my good guy’s list,up there with the Rev,,Derek Bateman,Wee Ginger Dug,Grousebeater……..I salute them,I salute you.

    There is nothing like an up and coming election to see how the media,but in particular the new media goes into frenzy mode.New media’s big selling point was it’s ‘magnetic levitation’ trick unlike the BBC/MSM it would be,I don’t know…….be more intelligent,it would get it right,rather too quickly,some people have just fallen off their high horses and with a thud.

    My view,correct me if I am wrong,the Rev. is making the direct connection between crowd control,outside influences including alcohol consumption and personal responsibility,in crowd behaviour,using the thought provoking indirect approach.

    To summarise NP is good,alcohol ban at football is good,Labour are well just,sad,New Media is heading down the slippery Old Media road,rubbish journalism will always be rubbish journalism you know who you are,you need to up your game.

    SNP x 2

  169. Returnofthemac says:

    Dropping the grandkids off at school, then on came Kaye Union Adams. I was waiting for the British Biased Corporation’s last ditch attempt to blame the SNP for the panda not conceiving, surprised they didn’t. I gave it 2 minutes before turning off.

    Hey ho last day leafleting and going to see Nicola in Glasgow.

    Tick Tock


  170. Andrew McLean says:

    Who is volunteering to inseminate the panda, is that Labour policy I didn’t see it in their manifesto, but then I didn’t see anything else? do you think the unionist on realising they are going to be humped have decided to pretend the election has been cancelled?

    Neocon, angry manieu,

    You need to get someone to get that car seat fixed Now don’t say I don’t care!

    what’s with the nationals fixation with the RISE party? is there something they like, or more likely, someone verdantly blonde, photogenic, I think we should be told!

  171. Robert Peffers says:

    @call me dave says: 4 May, 2016 at 10:19 am:

    Funny puns, dave, made me laugh.

    “Postal votes getting sifted through at Fife house this morning but reports say …not as many as expected to be placed in bundles to be counted with the main vote.

    Why? Don’t know, apathy I hope not, handing in your postal on the day, maybe.”

    Nah! Fife are under great suspicion after ballot boxes went AWOL during a previous count. This has never been satisfactorily explained away. I had great difficulty checking that my own postal vote had even been received.

    I had posted it last week but it was only acknowledged as being received yesterday. I had visited their site. After several days without acknowledgement I emailed pireturn and that same evening the site acknowledged receipt of my papers.

    Unfortunately I have no other option than postal votes as my disability can leave me flat on my back in an instant.

    Mostly I would make it to the Polling Station but cannot predict if I would even be able to get out of bed on any given day.

    So there’s your answer, dave. The Fife electorate just no longer trust the Fife Council lot with ballot papers, counts or just about anything else, come to that.

  172. Andrew McLean says:

    Robert Peffers says “the Fife electorate just no longer trust the Fife Council lot with ballot papers, counts or just about anything else, come to that”.

    Oh come on Robert Kezia has spoken to them and they want to know your income tax details so they can pay you the £100 tax back that labour took in the first place? their going to set up a new department, new offices, new logo, Fife centre one tax office repayment services,of course they will need a senior staff group, directors of tax revenue, in fact this will be mirrored across the land, now wont that be fun!

  173. orri says:

    Isn’t Fife where the complaint about the drop of 230,000 registrations came from? Think it might have been Highlands and Islands though.

    Any way we’ve gone from the unprecedented number of postal ballots in the referendum to a system that’s a wee bit tighter. For one thing it allows an automated co-relation between where your NI number says you live for tax purposes and where you claim to live for getting a vote. A registrar could challenge your registration on that basis alone. A surprisingly reduced number of postal ballots might not be that surprising if some of those registered were afraid of being caught.

  174. orri says:

    Obviously saving pandas has nothing to do with the ever reducing number of unionist MSPs and future proposals to move from a vaguely proportional system to a representative one. There’s nothing subliminal about it at all.

  175. Robert McFarlane says:

    While I agree with most of what Donna Babington says, I still have some concerns. The named person system could end up just as the Social Work system has – overwhelmed or under resourced – depending on whether or not you work for said institution. I fail to see how a person unknown to the child or on the margins of their social system can become a trusted confidante. As someone who was a latch key kid from the age of 8 with a younger site and brother to keep an eye on I trusted very few people with personal info. So while I am not entirely against it I would be reluctant to fully support it.

  176. call me dave says:

    @Robert Peffers

    Ok Mr Peffers.

    Aye where is that man Lyndsay Roy? Gone! enter Mr Grant SNP.

    I’ll never forget that election it was ‘in the bag’ and many folk including me walked miles and miles with the message.

    Suddenly at the count it was a complete reversal… gloomy days and our first set back in Fife for a long time.

    Whenever I go to vote I always feel the presence of ‘The Marwick’ over my shoulder making sure it’s SNP x 2. 🙂

    Keep on keeping on we all appreciate your comments.

  177. JammyDodger says:

    Donna, thank you very much for writing this. Reliving old memories is hard and all the braver of you to tell the world. Respect.

  178. J Stewart says:

    I think it’s unfair to disregard everyone who disagrees with the named person scheme as people who simly don’t understand it. The harrowing circumstances described by the auther; under current legislation would and should already raise alarm bells and trigger investigation and intervention since abuse and neglect were taking place. Clearly at some point there was intervention if the auther was taken into care, although it should have happened sooner. I think the named peron scheme would be better received if the threshold for intervention and data sharing remained as ‘risk of harm or neglect’. What a number of people are wary about is the lowering of the threshold for intervention from neglect or risk of harm to “wellbeing” which is a highly subjective term and a much lower threshold.

  179. heedtracker says:

    Robert McFarlane says: As someone who was a latch key kid from the age of 8 with a younger site and brother to keep an eye on I trusted very few people with personal info. So while I am not entirely against it I would be reluctant to fully support it.

    Your experience is pretty irrelevant to the politicising of this whole BBC led SNP bad monstering. Its BBC r4 headline news, Britnat attack propaganda at near 2014 levels.

    Also, you were a latch key kid like a lot of children but why is this even acceptable in any apparently wealthy western country? Normalising this kind of child care is just part of a lot of far more entrenched UKOK tory socio economics.

  180. heedtracker says:

    So much for centre left England and all its gory glory. Rancid The Graun btl aint what it used to be

    ID17071882 2h ago

    Ha haaa!

    Infidel007 2h ago

    SNPs “Big Brother” scheme hit for six, Justice prevails. This would have been the start of even more namby pampy Government.

    dourscot 2h ago

    The Scottish people 1, Big Brother 0

    beyondparody 2h ago

    Thank goodness for a bit of common sense. It would start as a benign project but would soon take on Orwellian Big Brother facets resulting in total State control. Surely the SNP would be better concentrating on improving the lot of children caught in abusive relationships and abject poverty.

    ID081276 2h ago

    Every child will now be assigned a specialist SNP activist.

    Elaine Nibloe 2h ago

    Herself will not be pleased.

    ID17071882 2h ago

    Thank goodness the courts have blocked these sinister plans from the SNP.

    gjjwatson 2h ago

    Well done. This was another attempt to dump an impossible responsibility on to public servants.
    Ministers in recent years have gotten into the habit of offloading responsibilities to others. There was once a time when ministers accepted responsibility for stuff that happened on their watch. With the growth of Media witch hunts however they pass the hot potato to those beneath them.

    tjhvaliants 2h ago

    I’m glad. It assumed parents were not capable and turned professionals into Gestapo figured who would have created a lot of antagonism within families.

    Trumbledon 2h ago

    I can’t believe the nerve of the SNP, how dare they pass illegal legislation in contravention of their human rights obligations? 🙁

    I H Pearson 2h ago

    Another ridiculous idea from the SNP.
    They range from the introduction of Gaelic road signs ( a mere £24 million) to Polis Scotland – a complete shambles at untold cost. Meanwhile child poverty in our cities is unchanged.

    missymooabu 2h ago

    I expect the most rabid separatists will see this as Westminster bullying us poor oppressed Scots – but surely this is another example of sturgeon’s ineptitude at governance.

    I accept that the snp are easily the most popular political party and won on a landslide – so no point in calling for another election – but sturgeon’s position must be looking shaky! After standing side by side with the tories on europe (which she emphatically denied she would ever do) to losing this case after endless advice, she has to accept she’s personally not up to the job.

    Hypatia01 2h ago

    Given that amateurs occupy the Regional Assembly, one is not really surprised that Commend Centre at Holyrood have tried to over extend themselves.

    Just a few cut n paste from Guardian comment section. Why Scots votes NO 2014 to be reigned over by our chums in the south etc…

    Its not just that there are so many centre left Guardian tory nutters, like the one calling for another Scottish election, its that they’re not any different from the whole BBC led UKOK hackdom in Scotland.

  181. call me dave says:

    I was angry when I heard on radio shortbread that the ‘Named Persons Bill’ had failed. Only two days consideration when some assault cases are taking months to be resolved eg: Rimmer.

    But never fear, an hour later in the car I was assured by Reeval Alderson, well known stammerer for the said Auntie’s radio shortbread that the Bill had passed two of the three litmus tests and that Mr Swinney was going to tweak that third one asap! 🙂

    John Beattie took the news well when Reeval told us and Swinney was on to confirm it. I am much happier now, merely a detail it seems. Aye right!

  182. Chris says:

    The Scottish government have no right to tell parents how they should raise their children, unless the parents are breaking the law. Christian groups are opposed to this because it undermines God-given parental authority and is an unnecessary intrusion into family life. I used to like this website when it talked about independence, now it is just an SNP apologist website.

  183. ROBBO says:

    Like most reasonable good minded people I was seething with rage when I heard the judgement and even more so By the previous comment by ‘Chris’. For the last four hundred years the fight to separate Church and State has been raging and it seems to this day victory is not yet in sight. My beef is not about the legislation itself but firstly the frustration the Scot Government has failed to construct this Bill so that appears to stands up to ECHR scrutiny is mind boggling. This is basic stuff and in my view the legal advisors to the ScotGov are not up to the job and should be sacked. Secondly and more fundamentally why in a secular state why are we being held to ransom by some religious crackpots who have their own brainwashed view of morality which has no place in a modern democracy. I sincerely hope as has been outlined by other websites that the Scot Gov press ahead with this legislation asap.

  184. Westviews says:

    Thank you for being courageous enough to write this Donna. If only one child is saved from abuse it will have been worth it. The unionist parties are despicable to use this as a political football and I hope folk will see them for what they are.

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