Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Blogs & opinions
  4. Journal editorial March 2021

Journal editorial March 2021

9th March 2021

 

Spring is in the air, at least when the sun is shining, and as the sap starts to rise, so emotionally most of us look forward to (hoped for) good months ahead. 

With it, this year, totally understandably, comes a growing desire, if not impatience, to be free of the restrictions that have added to the mental burden of the winter months, on top of what we endured last year. 

Therein lies a difficult issue for government, reflected in a sharp division of public opinion. On the one hand there are those who argue that COVID cases are declining, most people in the vulnerable groups have been vaccinated, and individuals’ wellbeing and significant sectors of the economy will both suffer perhaps irretrievable damage if there is not an early return to near normality. On the other, many respond that we have made the mistake of downplaying the risks before, a large proportion of the population are still capable of catching and spreading the virus, the vaccine is in any event not an absolute shield and you cannot isolate vulnerable people from the rest of society, and the claimed choice between health and the economy is a false one. 

For what it’s worth, in my view those last points are the clinchers. There is no question that individual liberty has been seriously compromised during the pandemic, to an extent that would previously have been considered unthinkable. But if a mutating virus is still at large, to whose benefit is it if we encourage activities that could yet reverse recent improvements in infection and death rates? 

Easy answers there are not, and a judgment call has to be made as to the point at which freedoms can be increased without risking a rise in serious illness that would also re-burden our health service when it is due some much needed recovery time. But even that is not the end of the story. 

At that point also, if not before, we must not lose sight of the needs of those whose livelihoods will remain at risk for a longer period due to their working lives and/or personal finances being thrown into disarray – many of them with no resources to fall back on. Emergency protections have been in place regarding housing rights, debt enforcement, welfare benefits and more, and the transition out of these will bring equally pressing questions. Lawmakers and policy makers alike have a heavy responsibility to ensure that the disadvantaged are not left behind in the rush to restart. The first announcements of support measures continuing through the summer are encouraging, but they need to evolve into a properly woven, and probably continuing, safety net.

Add To Favorites

Additional

Categories

  • Equality and diversity
  • opinion
  • practice management
  • law society of scotland
  • executries
  • tax
  • mental health-adult incapacity
  • trusts-asset management
  • employment
  • europe
  • civil litigation
  • professional regulation
  • family-child law
  • criminal law
  • information technology
  • careers
  • reparation
  • human rights
  • property (non-commercial)
  • consumer
  • licensing
  • commercial property
  • planning/environment
  • insolvency
  • immigration
  • government-administration
  • welfare/benefits
  • client relations
  • education-training
  • interview
  • dispute resolution
  • corporate
  • agriculture-crofting
  • reviews
  • banking-financial services
  • intellectual property
  • New lawyers
  • Business support
  • Law Society news
  • Non-regulatory committees
  • Regulatory Committee
  • Career growth
  • International
  • Schools
  • Wellbeing
  • Member benefits
  • Professional support
  • Research and policy
  • In-house lawyers
  • Regulation
  • For the public
  • Legal aid
  • obituary
  • Public Policy Committee
  • Sustainability
  • Professional support
  • Wellbeing

News Archive

  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited