children's act

The more I hear about this Act the more it concerns me. I appreciate that children have to be protected. However I am not convinced that parts of the Act will enhance their safety, in fact bits of it are likely to be counter productive. My concern is about the 'named person' element.

It is just another step on the road to State interference and control of people's lives.

Even before the Act comes into force, their are enough worrying interferences at work.

Presently the files of children, mostly on line files, kept and maintained by Children and Families Social Work Services are able to be accessed by other services, for example Education. The families have no say in this practise and in fact, neither do the Social Work professionals, who are not even consulted. Their 'confidential' files can be accessed by third part 'partners' remotely without the case worker knowing.

The files of children held by Education Services are not open to access by Social Work professionals. So it is a one way process and worrying to say the least. In fact I am not sure what the Information Commissioner would make of the practise.

Back to 'named persons' and the Children's Act.

Having worked for many years in the fields of protecting people I am only to aware of how a policy or piece of legislation, designed and penned with a clear view of what it is to achieve, can be misunderstood, manipulated or misused over time.

While the 'spirit' of the legislation will be clear to many, those operating with intuition and understanding, it will not stand the test of the grey suits, the 'jobsworths'. The late Friday afternoon brigade who have been aware of some issue for a day or two, however, lacking the courage of the normal person, they leave it to one side, then ditch it on another professional just as they are shutting up shop for the night or weekend.

Oh, the wee one did not appear for the school trip, oh the wee one has been looking a bit tired lately, oh the wee one has not been concentrating lately, oh, and I noted he was a bit smelly last week.

Get the parents in, get the Social Services involved, make them the big bad wolves, check out the parents drinking habits, check out their bank account.

You will see where this is going. Innocent families will be in distress, who cares? The most vulnerable parents, the poor and perhaps not as well educated, the ones who cannot afford a lawyer, they will fall foul of the actions of the grey suits. Remember, the law is aimed at them anyway.

Oh, I was only doing my job. You know the one's I mean, the untouchables, the ones with no intuition, no grey areas for them, their attire apart, simply black and white.

This is another step, even if the authors did not see it, on the road to more State interference in family life, a Police State.

The trouble with most Police State situations is, you did not see it coming.

labour councillors deny equal pay to low paid women

I see that South Lanarkshire Council has been instructed to pay about 3,000 or so of their lower paid staff, mostly women, £75 million in back pay. The women have been fighting for this money, equal pay actually, for near on a decade. In fact some of the claimants never lived to collect what they were entitled to.


Even today, having lost their ten year delaying action to pay the workers what they in fact were entitled to all along, South Lanarkshire Council are still in denial. The women were seeking equal pay, not a 10 % rise in their wages, not a 5% rise in their wages, no, not even a 1% rise in their wages. No, none of that. They merely were asking to be paid what they were lawfully entitled to under equal pay legislation. An Act that came alive in 1970, forty four years ago.


A senior figure said that South Lanarkshire has long been committed to equality of pay for those in comparable jobs, regardless of gender and we are glad to be in a position to continue to lead the way on this issue by settling with these claimants. Oh, is that so?!


The Chief Executive of South Lanarkshire Council goes on about people being the Council's most valuable asset and how they work in partnership with their Trade Union colleagues, so they, the Council, can continue to take a lead in delivering best practice in their people policies and procedures. We, South Lanarkshire Council, are the area’s “natural leader” and we aim to set a good example for other employers.

The Council's values include the following commitments:

The Council will be honest, open and consistent in all our dealings with people, so that we can earn and maintain their trust. We will demonstrate decisive and impartial leadership. We will promote the development of a just and equal society.

We will behave with courtesy, decency, dignity and tolerance.

We will be an excellent employer, leading the way in recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce. We will treat our employees fairly and we will not tolerate unfair discrimination. 

So, where is the decency, the dignity, the trust, the promotion of a justice, equality and the bit about not tolerating unfair discrimination.


Not only that, it is a labour controlled Council who have no doubt been in the vanguard of this ten year denial of workers rights. Yes, a labour Council. Overwhelmingly labour with 37 elected councillors, 11 of whom are female.

Present day Labour assails us with their commitment to fairness and equality, including equal rights and equal pay for women. They even 'fix' party lists to load up with more women.

I will remind you of some history: 'Labour stands for equality between men and women: equal political and legal rights, equal rights and privileges in parenthood, equal pay for equal work.' That is lifted directly from the Labour Party Manifesto of 1923.

It is a disgrace and it evidences the true values of a Labour Party who have consistently ridden on the backs of working people to the Party's benefit. In fact it is logical for them, the Labour Party, to keep working people down, otherwise where would they find a back to steal a lift on?