Judges dismiss bid to scrap state snoopers
But campaigners vow to take their fight to Europe
PLANS for state guardians for every child in Scotland are set to go ahead after a legal challenge by campaigners was rejected.
But they vowed to fight on, taking the battle to the Supreme Court – the UK’s highest court – and, if that fails, to Europe.
Judges who threw out the bid to scrap legislation paving the way for ‘named persons’ said that even if the scheme breached parents’ human rights, they still believed it had a ‘legitimate aim and is necessary in a democratic society’. They also accused critics of the SNP scheme of ‘hyperbole’.
The No To Named Persons (NO2NP) campaign said it would appeal the ruling from Scotland’s top civil court, the Court of Session. Among those involved in the legal challenge were the Christian Institute, the Christian char- ity Care and the Family Education Trust, as well as individual academics and parents.
The named person measure, contained in the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act, will assign a single point of contact, such as a headteacher or health visitor, to look out for the welfare of children under 18.
The Scottish Government says the service will be a safety net to help families and children if they need it, to speed things up and avoid families having to speak to different services. But critics say it effectively creates state ‘snoopers’ with sweeping powers to interfere in family life.
Dismissing the appeal, Lord Justice Clerk Lord Carloway said: ‘The mere creation of a named person 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 on the legal, moral or social relationships within the family. The legislation does not involve the state taking over any functions carried out by parents in relation to their children.’
The judges ruled that even if the scheme were seen as interfering with the European Convention on Human
‘Intrusion on family life’
Rights, the court ‘ considered that such interference is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, the prevention of crime, the protection of health or morals or of the rights of others’.
Children’s Minister Aileen Campbell welcomed the decision and said she hoped the petitioners would take comfort from the findings. But NO2NP spokesman Simon Calvert said: ‘ We will be appealing this ruling. We do not believe the judges engaged properly with the arguments we put forward, so we will take them to the Supreme Court. Ultimately we may go to Europe.’
Scottish Tory young people spokesman Elizabeth Smith said: ‘ The policy remains unacceptable because of its intrusion on family life and because it diverts resources away from the most vulnerable children.
‘Professionals who are expected to deliver the policy say it is unwork- able so I am sure the NO2NP campaigners will continue their fight.’
A Scottish Government spokesman said: ‘This policy was informed by experts with the intention of putting the best interests of the child at the heart of decision-making.’