Scottish Elections who do you think will take the majority of Seats?

[Fundays12]

As a Scot I genuinely have no idea who to vote for.

I dont trust the SNP and find John Swinney completely incompetent. I wouldnt trust him to run my household budget let alone the countries so he is out for me. I cant stand labour, the tories well are not my cup of tea, lib dems and green would never get my vote.

However i dont seem to be alone in having no idea who to vote for which leaves me wondering who will take the majority of seats across Scotland. What do others think will happen?

Please don't tar current leaders with that brush.
Scouts have done so much on safeguarding both Children and Leaders to prevent accusations and false accusations.

As I said the vast majority of leaders fall into it, either as a young leader or as a parent, with the odd one or two to get experience for their CV.
I don't think I know any who woke up one morning and suddenly wanted to get involved

I have explained that in the last paragraph of the text that you've linked to. Do you disagree with that? Perhaps if you can state what your issue with what I've said is, we can move forward with this.

Who has a chance of getting in then?

Nobody because the SNP has the stranglehold on the pro-Independence vote, with the Greens as back up.

All of the rest are trying to get the same anti-Independence vote! What one of them needs to do is take independence out of the equation to dampen its importance, and also over time to entice weary pro-independence people to vote for them.

Just having the argument boiled down to YES v. NO is completely redundant. It's the SNP's reason for existing, the Conservatives are quite literally the Conservative and Unionist Party so they won't take it out of the picture.

Labour or the LIbDems have a massive opportunity to take some space that is currently unoccupied and become something decent that provides a real alternative. But they're both so doggedly wedded at an executive level to being anti-independence and pretty much nothing else that they can't conceive that stepping away from the argument is the only thing that'll reduce its clout.

I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people in the country who would jump at the chance to vote positively for a party whose message was that there are more important policies and subjects to discuss and try to implement, than keeping on with the old record.

No, but it has zero to do with named person. Do you even know what it is?

So the problem of paedophilia within scouting has been solved? I'm very happy to hear that. Can I ask about timing - so from which year can we safely assume that there was no child sex abuse within scouting?

Plus I didn’t link to anything. You did.

Sadly, many paedophiles are actually parents, whether they abuse their own children or not.
Just as an example, I actually know someone who was part of a local baby-sitting circle. Both mums and dads babysat. The thing basically collapsed when everyone was informed by the police that one of the dads had been charged with child sex abuse.

You'll notice that that particular paedophile made us of his status as father to access other children.

This is the thing the named person scheme was meant to highlight. For the sake of the children involved.

This is what I wrote in the last para of the text that you "responded to":

• What they have to do with the named person legislation is that if, for whatever reason, there is an opportunity to have one to one access to children, boys or girls, paedophiles will take advantage of that. The Named Person scheme would have provided access to and power over every child in Scotland.

Yes, I know what the proposed Named Person scheme was about. A very large number of adults would have been spending one-to-one time with, in total, all the children in Scotland. The more vulnerable children would doubtless have provided more opportunities for those adults to spend time with them, to discuss their problems. It is highly unlikely that nobody would have volunteered for the role for the purposes of grooming.

Being a scout leader also provides opportunities to see children on a one to one basis. Eg the young man I knew at college had gone into the communal tent for an afternoon nap, and the scout leader had followed him in and sexually abused him. Some men clearly became scout leaders for that reason.

But apparently there is no longer any child sex abuse at all in the scouting movement, which is excellent news.

Thanks for proving that you have no clue what the named person scheme was trying to achieve. the named person would have had no access to the children involved. None.

It’s actually frightening how ill educated people are on a proposal for agencies to do joined up working so we never again have baby Ps.

I checked that with ChatGpt and they informed me that the named persons would have had one to one access to children. I don't trust ChatGpt one hundred percent though, so feel free to post your evidence on that point. Are you saying that NO adults would have had access to children? So no adult would have talked to a child?

The evidence you send through will be very educational for the rest of us on this thread. I'm always keen to be educated so look forward to receiving it.

Google it. What do you think it was meant to achieve?

I honestly can’t believe people are this stupid. What do you think a named person is?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49757890

A brief overview of the named person scheme. Every child was meant to be assigned a specific adult who could be contacted by the child and would have access to detailed personal information about the child. Scrapped due to being a breach of our rights to private family life and being incompatible with data protection laws. It would also have clearly been a safeguarding problem and potentially attracted abusers looking for access to children. It is well recognised that any position of responsibility with access to children may be exploited by abusers (large majority being male). This would have been no exception.

I have just voted in Scotland - John Swinney is my MSP and I definitely didn’t vote for him. I would love him to loose his seat. I voted Labour on both slips

Rubbish. The named person would have been a data collector. This was in the aftermath of Baby P.

People reported his abuse. Some to the police, some to SW, some to the NHS, some to a childminders association and some to Education.

None of the agencies knew about the reports to the other ones. So there was no joined up working and he was murdered.

The named person legislation was to try to get agencies to work together. So every child was to have a named person in health or education depending on their age.

Every report made to the police, NHS, SW, Education etc was to be sent to that person so that a picture of abuse could be built up

The named person collated it all and then sent it all to SW.

Then proper interventions could be made.

At no time was any young person being “interviewed” by the named person.

There will also be people who consistently support the SNP's policies, but the Supreme Court (thank goodness for this voice of sanity in Scotland) ruled on the issue and fortunately it didn't go ahead. You can read more about it here - and no amount of complaining on MN will bring it back https://no2np.org/has-the-named-person-scheme-really-been-scrapped-and-where-do-we-go-from-here/

I chose who to vote for only once I was in the booth- Labour for both papers- best of a bad bunch sadly.

exit polls tend to come out after the polls close so back of 10 maybe?