³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I thank the witnesses for their comprehensive introductions and updates. I want to look at isolation and loneliness. Catriona Melville represents Age Scotland and is well aware of the inequalities that the elderly have faced and continue to face. They have also experienced anxiety, a loss of self-esteem and a lack of access to healthcare. All that contributed to a tsunami effect for older people during lockdown. Many were left to their own devices, and many, because of their age and the responsibility that they felt for others’ lives, chose not to seek help initially but eventually had to because of their circumstances. It would be good to get a flavour of that from Age Scotland.

I would then like Margaret Lance to comment on how that impacted on the BEM community. Although the elderly population in that community had a way of managing themselves, the response was perhaps not co-ordinated appropriately by services and policy makers; it was much more informal. In your opening remarks, you said that you are doing work to manage all that and that the third sector took on a much bigger role in trying to manage those people.

From the two of you, I would like to hear what you think the ways forward are, because we are not finished with the pandemic and there may be lessons to be learned.

With regard to the impact of the pandemic on physical health, there is an indication that long Covid seems to be affecting more women than men. It would be good to get some views on what effects that has on women’s participation in the labour market. Some, or most, women who work part time may find that their employer’s response when they are having to cope with long Covid is inadequate, and women are more likely to be in jobs that may not entitle them to statutory sick pay and so on.

I ask Susie Fitton to give us an idea of how that issue is having an impact, and how it might progress.

We need to find that out. Thank you.

I have a quick supplementary. You talked earlier about the women’s business centre and the funding that has been put together. Will that be a game changer and, if so, what kind of game changer? Will it just assess and look at where we are and what is required? Will there still be a gap, even with that centre and the resource behind it?

I thank the witnesses for their evidence so far. You have talked about the difficulties of being at home, and how that might not be the safest place due to multiple pressures. Financial instability was mentioned, as was the fact that more unpaid domestic work is being carried out. There is no doubt that, during the pandemic, there has once again been an increase in violence against women. The pandemic creates the perfect storm as people trapped in that environment are not able to access the support that they need.

What lessons can we learn, and what do they tell us about the support mechanisms that we need to put in place so that we do not abandon people to such circumstances? Agencies might need to be involved, but some of them were taking longer to get involved because, understandably, they had other priorities and commitment to deal with. However, that put individuals in a very precarious situation, which has continued throughout the pandemic. That in itself created even more difficulties, and there will be consequences as a result. It would be good to get your thoughts on that issue. Eilidh, perhaps you could start, given that you spoke about the issue earlier.

There is real sympathy with the petitioner, and we need to take note of the harrowing nature of her experience and circumstances.

I acknowledge what you have said about the position of the procurator fiscal, convener, but I think that there is scope for us to ask the Royal College of Pathologists and others for guidance on where the request in the petition would sit.

I agree with that. Although we were advised that a review will take place by 2023, there is a duty of care for transport authorities and bus operators to ensure that individuals are not discriminated against if they attempt to use transport in situations similar to the one that Paul Sweeney has just described. We should investigate other ways to take further evidence from individuals who have experienced that kind of situation, to see whether we can clarify the situation and put some pressure on.

There is scope for us to ask the advice of organisations—possibly the Law Society of Scotland and the Family Law Association—that may be able to give us some views on the scope of what the petition is trying to engage with. As a first stage, it would be useful for us to clarify and take more evidence on the process.

There is no doubt that there is scope to do work on the petition, because of the situation. As the Scottish child abuse inquiry has a narrow remit, to ensure that survivors do not feel they are not being listened to or that their experiences are not being acted upon, it would be useful for us to take some more evidence on the matter to clarify it. The last thing that we want is for survivors to feel that, under the circumstance that we have in Scotland, they are not being given parity with what is happening in other parts of the United Kingdom. There is currently a belief that that is the case. For that reason alone, we need to be open and up front about the matter.

I agree with Paul Sweeney. There has been a mass exodus in some locations, with 20 to 30 per cent of the industry suffering through lack of resources. We have an opportunity to take some evidence and find out exactly what is happening on the ground, and that will help us assess how we progress with the petition.