Given the ongoing controversy surrounding the demise of Kids Company, it is surely high time that each and every state sponsored ‘children’s charity’ was subject to far greater scrutiny by the taxpayers who are forced to fund them. At the very least their government cheerleading activities should be covered by the Freedom of Information Act as some of their directors are prone to running away when asked awkward questions on public websites.
By way of (just one iceberg-tipping) example, our attention has been drawn to yet another begging letter which has just been published in the Third Force News from a gaggle of GIRFEC cheerleaders representing the frankly booming Scottish children’s charity sector, each of whom has a vested financial interest in forcing a Named Person on every child in Scotland to play the role of cuckoo in every family’s nest while feathering their own. Here they are asking some (purely rhetorical) questions of the government that feeds them, having clearly lost touch with the reality experienced by the rest of us.
SallyAnn Kelly, Aberlour chief executive; Martin Crewe, Barnardo’s Scotland director; and Alison Todd, Children1st chief executive want the Scottish Government to answer some questions
Only because they already know the answers they’ll get which have already been prepared and which will guarantee their own job security, unlike the citizens of Scotland who are treated to identical dismissive and patronising template responses from MSPs and Minsters alike. It always pays handsomely to agree with, and follow the orders of, the state that feeds you.
As Scotland’s leading children’s charities…
What they actually mean: “As the biggest taxpayer funded, pet government ‘charities’ [the loosest possible definition thereof] in Scotland, who will always dance to the state’s preferred tune…”
Could an earlier intervention yield more positive results? Do we offer children and families sufficient support to address emerging problems, or do we act too late in too many families which results in the need for more extreme measures?
What they mean: “Please could even bigger pots of taxpayers’ money be directed our way to do the government’s bidding and interfere in the private lives of every child and associated adult to profile the entire population? We know [or maybe they don’t?] that it’s illegal under human rights legislation, but hopefully the increasingly stultified ‘sovereign people of Scotland’ won’t notice until it’s too late, especially if we keep lying by rote.”
The report is a wake-up call for children’s services in Scotland. We need to move from rhetoric to meaningful action.
What they mean: “We want even more money to spout even more useless rhetoric, while vulnerable children get lost in a sea of soft targets whose personal data will generate the most revenue. A few tragedies down the road [there have already been two recent child fatalities in Edinburgh], we’ll demand even more money to do even more of the same thing.” We say: Child protection is a difficult and deadly serious business, whereas early interference and associated data theft is a much cushier number.
Alongside the new Named Person system, the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act introduced the power to make specific provision for children on the edge of being taken in care. While some very urgent cases may require a CPO, for most children an effective integrated pathway from universal services, to targeted interventions and intensive family support would be a better way to address their needs.
What they mean: “Now that the Parent Replacement Act has been forced through the Scottish Parliament on the basis of the policy-based evidence we were commissioned to produce for rubber stamping by slumbering Z-list politicians at Holyrood, we now need even more taxpayers’ money to allow us to interfere in the lives of every family.” We say: Just think of it as job creation scheme for mainly middle class SHANARRI nannies wielding wellbehaving indicators to justify their pointless box-ticking existence.
We know that children who continue to live at home, while being overseen by the local authority, have the poorest outcomes. Therefore it is vital that we know more about what supports were provided to these children, what impact those supports had and what we intend to do to provide other children in similar circumstances with the right support to thrive, not just survive.
What they mean: “The natives are getting restless about the abuse of children who are ‘looked after’ by the state and the exposure of establishment cover ups, so we need even more money to identify children for forced removal and adoption as early as possible.”
There is widespread recognition that early intervention is better than crisis intervention, but this research report provides evidence that it has proved challenging to make this shift.
What they mean: ” We will keep spouting our paid for, pre-scripted soundbites in support of the policies of our government paymasters as we are just the third arm of the state. In fact we’ll describe as ‘evidence’ anything that fits our grab-a-grant agenda as we have luxurious lifestyles to maintain at the expense of children and families.” We say: In fact the only ‘widespread recognition’ is among the sock puppets who have a vested interest in providing forced support and interference in exchange for mountains of taxpayers’ money. Principled, non compromised, right minded citizens and experts disagree with the practices of illegal profiling, predictive policing and eugenics.
The report is a wakeup call for children’s services in Scotland. We need to move from rhetoric to meaningful action. If we do not, children will continue to suffer.
What they mean: “Stand and deliver! Give us the money!” [bleat and repeat, ad nauseam]
And a final note on the most repetitive and nauseating soundbites of all:
As Scotland’s children’s charities, we share the aim of the Scottish Government
A shared language (Newspeak) and a common purpose, that’s for sure, as (data) sharing takes priority over caring.
…to make Scotland the best place in the world to grow up.
They’d better start closing the borders, then, since families are selling up and leaving the country, some have sent their children on ahead to stay with relatives in order to escape the SHANARRI Stasi and others have turned down jobs that require relocation to Scotland. As one departing Scot commented: “We really didn’t fancy being extras in the ‘Sound of Music’.”