ONE of the many tests by which a country is deemed to be truly progressive and enlightened was failed by the SNP Government during the referendum on Scottish independence. This one concerned our treatment of prisoners, an issue which has long disfigured Scotland’s claims to be a beacon of fairness and equality. The SNP put itself in the territory normally held by the Right’s howling banshee division when it refused prisoners in Scottish jails a vote in the referendum. It was an act of sheer political cowardice that smacked of bowing to the baying mob and went against the party’s own instincts.
Permitting our prison population a vote on Scotland’s future would have been the act of a civilised nation comfortable in its own skin. Our jail population is one of the highest in Europe with high rates of re-offending contributing to this. So what better way of addressing deep-rooted criminal attitudes by attempting to include prisoners in the Great Debate that was held up by the Electoral Reform Society as one of the finest examples of democratic engagement in the world. Instead, ever afraid of its own shadow and petrified by the prospect of authentic radical action, the SNP took the easy option and refused this little act of charity.
It was an illuminating episode that presaged the SNP’s actions in the years that were to come. This is a party which seems to value the retention of power more than the core values it unfailingly espouses at election time. Winston Churchill had this to say as Home Secretary 107 years ago: “The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilisation of any country.” In 2014 Scotland and its government failed that test.
I’m not aware of anything significant that Churchill ever said about Britain’s care of its elderly, who in modern Scotland are prisoners of another sort but prisoners all the same. Perhaps this is because society’s attitude towards old people simply wasn’t a pressing issue in the early years of the last century. Comparatively few people grew old and then were looked after as best they could by family. The living conditions that prevailed in many working class neighbourhoods up until the 1970s were so horrifically widespread it was impossible to isolate the suffering of the aged poor.
In recent years, though, Scotland’s older people are living longer and enjoying greater degree of health and sprightliness than any preceding generation. In a civilised society this would be a cause for rejoicing and an endorsement of genuine social and cultural progress. In the middle of the 20th century the average life expectancy for males and females in the UK was around 15 years less than it is today, according to the Office for National Statistics. In 2011 life expectancy at birth was almost double what it was in 1841. In the first half of the 20th century the jump in life expectancy was mainly due to health improvements in the young helped by mass programmes of immunisation. In the latter half of the century and beyond, health improvements and the lifestyle of the elderly is helping us live longer. In Scotland, though, care of our elderly has come to be regarded as something of a chore that can barely be justified in times of austerity. In this the elderly are joined by the mentally and physically handicapped as those sections of society on the verge of being regarded as a burden a young and vibrant nation can’t afford. Earlier this week Donald Macaskill, Chief Executive of Scottish Care, the main organisation in Scotland representing care providers, finally said what many of us already suspected; that the care provided to many elderly people in Scotland is “obscene and illegal”.
He added: “I can count on one hand the number of individuals in care homes who have been given the choices they are supposed to get.” The choices he was referring to are those guaranteed by laws on Self Directed Support which decree people with disabilities or support needs should be given control of their own care. This has been embedded in Scotland’s statute books since 2013 but is being flouted by local authorities restricting the choices available to people who require care.
The failings in our duty to the elderly and infirm are part of a pattern of neglect evident in all areas. They also point, depressingly, to a creeping attitude in our society that equates to wholesale indifference to the plight of the elderly. As usual, it is also most acutely felt by those living in our most disadvantaged areas as they have fewer material resources to mitigate the effects of society’s contempt.
Scotland’s population projections indicate the number of people aged 75 and over will increase by 28 per cent from 420,000 in 2012 to 530,000 in 2022 and then continue rising steadily until it reaches 780,000 in 2037 – an increase of 86 per cent in just a quarter of a century. It’s one of the compelling reasons why Scotland needs its own immigration laws and why the prospect of free movement disappearing under Brexit will be keenly felt here. We, more than ever, need the foreign workers who have been a mainstay of health care in Scotland for decades.
It’s inevitable councils face tough spending decisions stemming from the UK Tory Government’s one-sided austerity programme. Sadly, it’s also inevitable the cuts will fall on services intended to relieve the suffering of those with age-related conditions.
A culture of death stalks civic Scotland where the lives of those deemed to be a burden are valued a little less than the able-bodied and strong-minded. It’s what has fuelled the momentum of the Assisted Suicide lobby and the accompanying resentment at the cost of palliative care. It’s also evident in the campaign to permit abortions right up until birth. For, when human life is so devalued that we threaten it at its most fragile and early stages, then the insidious withdrawal of basic care at the end of days follows with terrifying certainty.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel