WE’LL SUE THE STATE SNOOPERS

Backlash over illegal Named Person scheme

FAMILIES are set to launch a mass legal action against state snoopers after a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court. Campaigners warn areas with Named Persons already in place as part of pilot projects could face an avalanche of claims after the Scotland-wide scheme was declared illegal. While the brakes have been slammed on the SNP’s plans for a state guardian for every child, a quarter of children already have one imposed on them.

Moreover, many of the councils already trialling Named Persons have allowed them to share information on children – which is at the heart of the Supreme Court decision that the system breached European human rights law.

After judges ruled that national data-sharing could breach families’ right to privacy, angry parents say they intend to sue.

Families are even being encouraged to swamp councils and health boards with ‘subject access requests’ to find

out what data is already held on them. It comes after one academic, who asked to remain anonymous, said he had been written up by a Named Person for failing to stop his son sucking his thumb.

The Scottish Government insists the judgment, which raises concerns that families’ confidentiality can be overruled too easily, does not relate to ‘current practice’ on data-sharing.

However, critics say the SNP cannot use trial schemes to defend its flagship policy then claim they are different from it.

On the possibility of legal action, Simon Calvert, of the No to Named Persons (NO2NP) campaign, said: ‘Many families whose lives have been impacted by illegal intrusions have approached us and are seeking legal advice.

‘Many more parents are yet to come forward, some unaware that the authorities have been gathering enormous amounts of private information about them, their children and their lifestyles.

‘Given the decision by the Supreme Court, families will now have the opportution nity to go down the legal route and seek to secure financial compensation for this gross invasion of their human rights.’

More than 270,000 children have a Named Person – a midwife, followed by a health visitor, then a teacher at school.

Councils including Edinburgh, Highland, South Lanarkshire, South Ayrshire and Falkirk already allow their ‘state snoopers’ to share data on children.

This is despite the ruling by the Supreme Court, which says guidance on datasharing is limited and the criteria set ‘too low a threshold for overriding duties of confidentiality’. This runs the risk of violating Article 8 of the European Conven- on Human Rights, which covers family rights, for a ‘disproportionate’ reason.

Councils say they share data only with parental consent, despite criticism some parents do not know how much is recorded. Highland Council says it has more guidance on how to share data than the SNP legislation includes.

The insistence of public bodies that their Named Person schemes differ from national policy has not convinced critics.

Tory MSP Adam Tomkins said: ‘We are trying to understand how the SNP can square the claims: firstly, that what the Supreme Court said does not apply to what is already happening elsewhere in Scotland and, secondly, that Named Person is fine and that this is the case because it has been rolled out in areas such as Highland without any problems.’

Writing online yesterday in response to an article about legal action, Lyn Mac wrote: ‘If anyone from the No2NP campaign can help our family with direction on this, I’d be for ever grateful, as they have caused our children endless heartache.’

Shirley Freeman wrote: ‘I am in the same boat. They destroyed my family.’

City of Edinburgh Council said it would examine the judgment with partner agencies and take joint decisions on it.

Des Dickson, head of education at South Lanarkshire Council, said: ‘It is important to understand that the judgment does not relate to past and current practice in relation to information sharing, which is covered by existing legislation.’

South Ayrshire Council said: ‘We will be examining carefully any current practice to ensure compliance with the law.’

A Falkirk Council spokesman said: ‘We will continue to share information in accordance with the requirements of relevant legislation, such as the Data Protection Act.’

Both councils say they will await further guidance from the Government.

A Scottish Government spokesman said the court ruling only requires changes to be made to ‘legitimate’ legislation.

He added: ‘Public authorities must comply with the requirements of relevant legislation, such as the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act, when providing services to children and families.’

Comment – Page 18 Emma Cowing – Page 21