Child abuse – Labour and Conservative history of neglect, even sickening collusion, and how the SNP’s Named Person Scheme could have saved thousands

By Professor John Robertson, former Primary School Teacher, Lecturer in Education and Associate Dean (Quality Assurance)

From Sky News, 11 years ago:

The former head of a paedophile group said Harriet Harman “didn’t even try” to stop his organisation’s involvement with the civil liberties council she worked for. Tom O’Carroll, who was chairman of the now defunct Paedophile Information Exchange, said neither Ms Harman or her Labour colleagues wanted to “rock the boat” for fear it might damage their careers.1

Many younger readers will wonder what on earth can this be.

The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) was a British pro-paedophile activist group, founded in October 1974 and officially disbanded in 1984. The group campaigned for the abolition of the age of consent. It was described by the BBC in 2007 as “an international organisation of people who trade obscene material“. Although it had a few women paedophiles as members, the organisation’s membership was mainly young, professionally educated male paedophiles, including youth and care workers. Its membership in 1977 was around 250, mainly in London and the South East;  the same number for membership was also reported in 1981…..A document penned on the organisation’s behalf by Harriet Harman (later deputy leader of the Labour Party), working as a legal officer at the time, placed the onus of proving harm on prosecutors and warned of the dangers of increasing censorship2

Many younger readers will still be wondering what on earth those boomers were thinking.

From the 1980s and well into the 21st Century, several ‘grooming’ gangs (mass child rapists) were operating across, especially the Midlands and North of England. Thousands of young girls, mostly from care homes run by unregistered staff, unlike in other parts of the UK, were raped repeatedly and a relatively small number of men, mostly Asian, were jailed. During that long time, successive Conservative and Labour governments did nothing to protect these children.

Only in 2022, was there an independent inquiry.3 It’s recommendations have not been applied and the same Conservative politicians now calling for a new inquiry, were the same ones responsible for the failure to do so then.

Although there have been no comparable scandals in Scotland and although all child care home staff must be registered here, the SNP Government tried in 2016, to further protect all children, with a Named Person Scheme:

It is a scheme that would assign every single child in Scotland under the age of 18 a state-appointed “named person”, with the aim of creating a single point of contact for parents or children who need advice, information or support relating to the welfare of children and young people.4

Despite widespread professional, expert and research support for the scheme, Scottish Labour and Conservative MSPs called for it to be paused5 and the UK High Court ruled against it.6

I find it difficult not to wonder how many young and vulnerable girls in England might have been saved terrible abuse, if the Labour and Conservative governments had cared more, if long before, they had insisted that care home staff must registered and if a scheme like the SNP’s Named Person Scheme had not been blocked for petty political point-scoring before then being copied across the UK.

Sources:

  1. https://news.sky.com/story/harman-did-not-act-over-paedophile-group-10415858
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange
  3. https://www.iicsa.org.uk/
  4. https://archive.news.stv.tv/politics/1362047-what-is-the-named-person-scheme-and-why-is-it-controversial.html#:~:text=It%20is%20a%20scheme%20that%20would%20assign%20every,to%20the%20welfare%20of%20children%20and%20young%20people.
  5. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36903513#:~:text=Judges%20at%20the%20UK%27s%20highest%20court%20have%20ruled,the%20Court%20of%20Session%20in%20Edinburgh%20last%20year.
  6. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36903513#:~:text=Judges%20at%20the%20UK%27s%20highest%20court%20have%20ruled,the%20Court%20of%20Session%20in%20Edinburgh%20last%20year.

7 thoughts on “Child abuse – Labour and Conservative history of neglect, even sickening collusion, and how the SNP’s Named Person Scheme could have saved thousands”

  1. The UK Supreme Court did not rule against the Named Person Scheme. They used it was legitimate. However, the judges ruled that when it came to the exchange of information between the various bodies the Scheme fell foul of the Data Protection Act. This Act allow for the exchange of information on the child if it is at serious risk. The Scot Gov, however, wanted the exchange of info on the basis of the wellbeing of the child. They were given extra time to come up with a definition of ‘wellbeing’ that would fit with the Data PRotection Act but were unable to do so.

    I am surprised you quote the BBC as a source for this and not the primary source which is the Supreme Court’s judgement.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  2. I had thought the Named Person policy was in place for vulnerable children in Scotland many years ago, not sure though. A bit O/T but let’s remember the UKEnglish administration (gov) attempted to block the UNCRC being put into Scots Law in Scotland. How disgusting.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. Having followed closely the failed attempt to legislate for the Named Person policy in Scotland, it’s interesting to read this coming from the Labour government in Westminster.

    It’s from a Press Release on the UK Government website (January 8, 2025): ‘Children’s bill to keep children safe from exploitation’.

    ‘.. a unique identifying number for every child are part of major reforms to help tackle the tragedy of children vanishing from education and protect young people from exploitation, grooming and abuse. ‘

    ‘The recent Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel Annual Report 2024 highlighted that children experiencing harm outside the home, including exploitation, were likely to be not enrolled in school, missing education or have poor school attendance, and that’s why the bill will also strengthen multi-agency safeguarding arrangements to QUICKLY identify significant harm.’ (my emphasis – and does ‘quickly’ mean ‘at the earliest stage’?)

    ‘ The bill will bring in unprecedented safeguards for home educated children, ratchet up powers for councils and compel local authorities to establish dedicated, multi-agency safeguarding teams to keep track of children.‘

    ‘Measures to reform children’s social care and help reduce the number of children missing education that are being introduced in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill include:

    • a unique number for every child – in the same way every adult has their own national insurance number – to join up systems and make sure no child falls through the cracks. A consistent identifier will allow those responsible for the safeguarding and welfare of children to better join relevant data and identify children who will benefit from additional support
    • if any child’s home environment is assessed as unsuitable or unsafe, local authorities will have the power to intervene and require school attendance
    • making sure every council operates best practice ‘multi-agency’ safeguarding panels, that bring together all the professionals that can best make sure children are kept safe both inside and outside the home.’

    And right on cue, the Christian Institute is triggered. From its website as an example: ‘It appears that home-educating parents will have to report if their child attends Sunday School, including names and addresses of the Sunday School teachers. This has echoes of totalitarian states.’

    See https://www.christian.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Childrens-Wellbeing-and-Schools-Bill-2.pdf

    Is another Supreme Court case likely?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. For those that recall the scares about the ‘named persons’ policy in Scotland, below are extracts from a UK Government briefing entitled: ‘The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill: what parents need to know‘ (December 17, 2025)

    Source: https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2024/12/the-childrens-wellbeing-bill-what-parents-need-to-know/

    ‘The Bill focuses on making sure no child falls through gaps between different services and that families can get help when they need it.’ (my emphasis)

    ‘The Bill introduces a series of safety measures that are new, with a focus on a joined-up system to stop vulnerable children falling through cracks in services.’

    ‘Keeping children safe is the key driver of this change, and existing data protection laws already make clear that safeguarding must be prioritised when deciding whether to share information. This new law will mean more confidence for those responsible for requesting and providing sensitive information – speeding up the process and providing a clear legal basis for sharing information on the grounds of safeguarding AND promotion of welfare.‘

    ‘Teachers and educators are often the first to spot warnings of abuse or neglect, and last year, schools were the second largest referrer of cases into children’s social care. But currently the law doesn’t require all nurseries, schools or colleges to be included in safeguarding arrangements. This means opportunities to protect children can be missed.’

    ‘We are placing a duty on the safeguarding partners for local authorities, police and health to give educators a greater role enabling them to influence decision-making at every level. ‘

    ‘This change will see better join-up between children’s social care, police, and health services with education, to better safeguard and promote the WELFARE OF ALL children in local areas. ‘

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to stewartb Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.