MSP attacks critics of state guardian plan
Backlash over ‘child abusers’ insult
A NATIONALIST politician last night questioned why anyone would oppose the SNP’s controversial ‘state guardian’ scheme and said some of those who do may be child abusers.
John Mason said ‘nonsense’ is being ‘spoken against the idea’ and that of all those who oppose the named persons scheme, up to 0.5 per cent could be paedophiles.
Seeking re-election as MSP for Glasgow Shettleston, his comments followed a series of Twitter exchanges on the Named Person project.
In one online discussion, he was asked: ‘What if you don’t want one [a Named Person] for your kids?’ and he replied: ‘Well someone abusing a kid would obviously not want a NP.’
But in an interview last night, he said: ‘There’s nonsense being spoken against the idea. Clearly the idea is to help people. Clearly not everybody [ who opposes it] is a child abuser – that would just be silly.’
He added: ‘Why would anyone say no to this scheme that’s like an ambulance there to help people? Of 0.5 per cent of people saying no, child abusers would be a tiny part of that. If half a percent are child abusers, 99.5 per cent are not.
‘What I’m saying is why are these 99.5 per cent saying no to the Named Person? I’ve not got any answer to that.’
Mr Mason then said: ‘That’s what I do on Twitter – I put the questions out there. I’m trying to get some serious reasons why people are against it.’
The row comes after an opinion poll found nearly two-thirds of Scots condemned the Named Person scheme as an ‘ unacceptable intrusion’ into family life.
And just last week, the Mail disclosed that tragic cot- death toddler Clyde Campbell was repeat- edly neglected by his barmaid mother in Inverness, despite being under the care of a named person.
The scheme, which is due to take effect across Scotland from August, is subject to an ongoing legal challenge launched by campaigners at the Supreme Court in London.
It will assign a named person – normally health visitors and headteachers – to all children up to the age of 18 to monitor their development, with the power to snoop on confidential medical records.
Critics maintain the scheme is well-intentioned, but vests too much power in the named person and risks undermining parents. Dr Stuart Waiton, senior lecturer in sociology and criminology at Abertay University in Dundee, said: ‘Mr Mason’s views are also deeply telling about how it will work and the way that named persons will be trained to view all parents with suspicion, as potential abusers, which in my view is a profoundly
‘Excessive intrusion into family life’
negative starting point for developing children’s services.’
One Twitter user asked Mr Mason: ‘So what happens if the child wants to involve the NP and the parents don’t?’ He replied: ‘ You mean if parents are abusing the child?’
And another user Tweeted Mr Mason saying: ‘Need 2 get ur mind out of the gutter john scots ‘love’ our kids.’ On Twitter, Mr Mason was then asked if he implied ‘those who don’t want NP abuse their kids?’ He replied, ‘No’.
Nicola Sturgeon was accused of being ‘disingenuous’ last week after claiming that participation in the scheme would not be obligatory, when in fact there will be no optout for parents.
Scottish Tory young people spokesman Elizabeth Smith said: ‘This is nothing whatsoever to do with political opinion, nor is it anything to do with the actions of the tiny minority of parents who have been found guilty of abusing a child.
‘It is statement of fact because so many parents worry about the excessive intrusion into family life and the fact that confidential data can be shared between the named person and professionals, sometimes without parental consent.’