Shielding Young People (Support)

– in the Scottish Parliament at on 3 June 2020.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Pauline McNeill Pauline McNeill Labour

Charlotte, aged 19, is self-isolating because she lives with her grandparents and has a health condition; Angela, aged 19, is a shielded person because she has an immunosuppressive condition. Both those young girls gave up employment in good-quality jobs because they were shielding, leading to not only a loss of income but a loss of opportunity.

The First Minister has already answered a question about youth unemployment, which is an important issue. Shielding young people get a generous food box but no other specific support for their situation. The Government’s former adviser, Naomi Eisenstadt, pointed out that 19 to 24 is the most critical time in a young person’s life, and I believe that that is true.

What thinking has been done about that group of young people who have been shielding and have lost out on opportunities because they have acted on Government and scientific advice? Has the First Minister thought about what positive action could be taken to help that group?

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

That is a really important point. I genuinely assure Pauline McNeill that we are thinking through the issues, in all their complexity, that shielded people face. We sometimes talk about shielded people as if they are a generic group, but every shielded person is an individual with their own needs and circumstances. It is absolutely right to say that the experience for young people will be different from the experience for older people—and it is not an easy experience for older people.

We are taking all those factors into account. In short, we are trying to move from a position in which we have given generic, blanket advice to people in the shielded category to one in which we are able to give more tailored advice that is specific to different conditions and to people’s individual circumstances. That raises a lot of complexities, and it is important that we get it right.

Support is available for essentials, food and medicine, but we have also given funding to mental health helplines and other services to try to give broader emotional and wellbeing support, which will continue to be important in the period to come.

My final point is about employers, although it will not apply to every single situation. Often, shielded people will not be ill or suffering symptoms, and they will still be able to work. I make an appeal to employers: if somebody is shielded, that does not necessarily mean that they cannot work. If they can work from home, employers should encourage and support them to do so, and I know that many employers will already be doing that.

I know people who are in the shielded category and I know how difficult the experience is. Moving from a blanket approach to a much more tailored approach is really important, but I hope that people understand that we are talking about people’s lives. The greater complexity involved means that it is all the more important that we apply real care, attention and consideration to the issues involved.