The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-08332, in the name of Keith Brown, on employment support for veterans and their families. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
14:58
I am delighted to open the debate on employment support for veterans and their families—particularly because, in the past hour or so, I had the opportunity to meet members of my old unit, 45 Commando, who came to Parliament at the request of Graeme Dey. I heard their concerns and questions about the role of the Scottish Government in the matter.
Members will know that the Scottish Government remains committed to improving support for our veterans and their families and, crucially, to ensuring that they face no disadvantage as a result of their service. We also aim to ensure that Scotland is their destination of choice following that service.
We take a whole-of-Government approach to supporting our veterans and armed forces communities across a number of policy areas including health, housing, employability and skills. We work together closely to improve and refine the support that is on offer to veterans and their families. I welcome the opportunity to lead the debate and to provide members with details of the work that is being undertaken to support veterans and their families—particularly in relation to their employment and skills.
Veterans and their families make a huge contribution to our local communities and to society, including through the vital experience and skills that they bring to the workforce. We want to maximise opportunities for them to do just that, as well as trying to address barriers that prevent them from fulfilling their potential.
As members including Edward Mountain will know, in the past, the families of members of the armed forces have not really been at the forefront of thinking among the armed forces community, but they are crucial to the good morale of those who serve in the forces. Why should they suffer in terms of employment prospects because a member of their family—usually a spouse—is a member of the armed forces?
I will mention some of the employability services that benefit our veterans and their families. For our part, we remain committed to working with stakeholders, communities and service users to design and deliver an employability system that is person centred and treats people with fairness, dignity and respect. With regard to the group that I have just mentioned—the families of armed forces members—it is crucial that the system acknowledges their experience.
It is disturbing to think that, in many recent years, nurses, teachers and, potentially, doctors have not been properly used or given proper opportunities to benefit Scotland and themselves. We should ensure that we address that.
I totally agree with the point about getting the families and spouses of serving personnel into work or employment. However, in my most recent couple of visits to RAF Lossiemouth, the biggest problem that was highlighted concerned childcare. The real issue that is stopping people getting back into work is not lack of opportunities in the workplace but lack of childcare. Surely, that will have to be addressed as a matter of urgency, too.
The Government has done a great deal in relation to childcare. Of course, some changes have been announced in the UK budget, which might allow for further changes in childcare provision in Scotland. The particular point that Jamie Greene raises about families of members of the armed forces has been raised with me in the past. I have an open mind about what we can do to further improve current provision; we will see in the course of time how the United Kingdom Government’s provisions work out and what the implications of the measures are for us, here in Scotland. We take a whole-of-Government approach, which obviously includes childcare.
We also take a “No one left behind” approach to transforming our employability support and our devolved employability service, which is called fair start Scotland. We are delivering support that is flexible and easy to navigate, and which integrates and aligns with other services and is driven by evidence and need.
Jamie Greene mentioned RAF Lossiemouth. There was a case of two people who were leaving the Royal Air Force who, between them, came up with an innovative idea or product that they wanted to sell into the defence market. They stayed in that general area. Too often, there are people whom the taxpayer has paid an awful lot of money to educate and upskill whom we are willing to see being dispersed to the four winds instead of retaining their skills here. I know that the member’s point was about childcare, but I stress that we must keep more of those people involved and working in Scotland for the benefit of the Scottish economy.
Our services aim to support those who face the greatest barriers to employment, including people who are experiencing mental health challenges or disabilities. We want to support them to gain and sustain fair employment. I will repeat a point that I have raised before. Notwithstanding the very low unemployment rate—it is down at 3.1 per cent, which I cannot remember having been the case in my adult lifetime—too often in the past, former members of the armed forces who got a job were expected to be grateful for having a job, but the jobs that they get should be commensurate with the experience, abilities and skills that they have developed in their time in the armed forces.
We know that individuals do not access services in isolation, so it is right that we take on the role of joining up services and, essentially, hiding the wiring that is behind them. We are continuing work to strengthen integration and alignment of services including housing, health, justice and others in order to create a more joined-up and effective system, thereby ensuring that everybody in Scotland, including our veterans, is given the opportunity to prosper and achieve their potential.
The cabinet secretary has acknowledged that we need a joined-up structure. One of the areas that has been identified is the benefits system. His benefit take-up strategy acknowledged that veterans are less likely to access the benefits that they are entitled to. How is that being managed?
Alexander Stewart has raised the issue, so I will mention that a shocking number of members of the armed forces access universal credit. That should simply not be the case. We should pay members of the armed forces enough so that they do not have to access benefits. That is crucial, because universal credit is often a passport to other benefits. If that is the problem to which Alexander Stewart referred, I am certainly willing to have a discussion with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government to see whether we can tear down some barriers. However, members of the armed forces should not have to draw down benefits such as universal credit.
As I said, we are trying as much as we can to do joined-up work on behalf of veterans and their families. We are trying to ensure that we have a holistic wraparound package of support, which can be particularly valuable to people who are leaving the armed forces. Our key worker approach can respond to the need for more intensive health support and advice.
Also, if we can get the Ministry of Defence to pass on people’s health records to a local general practitioner in advance of their leaving the armed forces, that could save so much time and so much grief for that person. If the GP can be made aware of where the person served and their health history, that can nip continuing problems in the bud. However, all the factors need to work effectively in tandem for there to be an effective transition, and our “No one left behind” approach holds the importance of that at its core.
Military leavers can also access support through our devolved national employability service, fair start Scotland, which offers 12 to 18 months of tailored and person-centred pre-employment support, along with up to 12 months of in-work support for individuals and their employers. The support that is offered includes access to workshops and guidance on utilising the transferable skills that veterans have gained during their service, thereby helping them to identify their strengths and potential career routes.
That is crucial because, so often in the past, people have come out of the armed forces not sufficiently aware of their skills. I have heard stories—as we all have, probably—of people saying, “Well, I can run and I can shoot a gun.” However, people learn so much more than that in the armed forces; if they do not understand that, they cannot pass it on to an employer.
Would Keith Brown welcome a better transition from the armed forces’ side, through their giving veterans who are leaving a better understanding of their skills? He spoke about the GP health record handover, which is crucial, but members of the armed forces sometimes struggle to identify the many skills that they have. Are the armed forces themselves not best placed to at least signpost the benefit of those skills in civilian society afterwards?
I absolutely agree. However, we have to work within the powers that we have. I hope that this will come up during the debate: we have developed a Scottish Credits and Qualifications Framework tool that allows civilian employers to understand, for example, what a particular armed forces training course involves and, crucially, allows veterans to articulate that in a way that is understood by civilian employers. However, I absolutely agree that, whether on health, employability or housing, the armed forces should be doing more while people are serving.
I am pleased to confirm that we have extended provision of fair start Scotland for another 12 months, which means that people can continue to be referred to that support until 31 March next year. During these times of financial uncertainty, especially for the most vulnerable people in society it is more important than ever that we ensure that people have access to the services and support that they need, so I know that the announcement will be welcomed.
It is also true to say that we are, despite the fact that most people transition successfully, all too aware of the challenges that some veterans face. Sometimes, we hear of people’s difficulties in finding suitable and enduring employment, or we hear that their experience and qualifications are not adequately understood and appreciated. That was the burden of my answer to Martin Whitfield’s question.
I am pleased that the tool that I mentioned was launched earlier this month. I am proud to say that the Scottish Government has provided funding for the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework partnership’s new military skills and qualifications discovery tool—which is quite a mouthful. Much of that work was carried out by my predecessor, Graeme Dey, during his time as Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans. It helps employers and educational institutions to understand the range of skills and expertise that people who leave the armed forces have to offer.
It is also worth highlighting that the timing of the tool’s launch could not have been better. Across the country, skills shortages continue in many sectors, and many employers are starting to realise that there could be a huge untapped resource in service leavers and veterans, and that that diverse group, with its wide range of skills, could help to address some of the shortages. The tool can help both veterans and employers to understand the contribution that they can make.
Our national strategy for economic transformation, “Delivering Economic Prosperity”, sets out our aim to
“ensure that people have the skills they need at every stage of life to have rewarding careers”.
People can—most do—leave the armed forces at a relatively young age, with another career ahead of them. Service leavers and veterans can and, indeed, must be part of that ambition, if we are to succeed.
We need to use existing talent in Scotland, but we also need to grow the working-age population. As part of that, we will implement a focused talent attraction programme, including targeted interventions, that is supported by the minister-chaired industry advisory group, to attract key skills and talent from the rest of the UK. That will include working with people who support the transition to civilian life to encourage individuals to make Scotland their home as they leave the military. New jobs that are emerging as a result of our transition to net zero will need new thinking, and we know that many existing jobs will require new and enhanced skill sets.
The Scottish Government is committed to increasing the number of veterans whom it employs, and we continue to explore a number of ways to achieve that, including through the going forward into employment programme. We had a stand at last year’s Career Transition Partnership careers fair, where we had the opportunity to engage directly with armed forces personnel. I should say that every MSP in the chamber can do the same as I do for my annual job fair, by ensuring that the armed forces are present and are able to offer opportunities to young people and others in their area.
That commitment is why, in late 2020, the Scottish and Welsh Governments jointly funded Business in the Community to deliver a refresh of the “Capitalising On Military Talent: Everything You Need To Know About Employing Armed Forces Veterans” toolkit to include information for employers on the benefits—to go back to a point that was raised earlier—of employing military people’s family members. That toolkit seeks to increase employers’ knowledge of how to employ partners successfully, and lets them know about the particular pressures that a spouse, for example, of someone who is serving in the military might face and how they can continue to participate and progress in the workforce.
We remain committed to contributing to the Forces Families Jobs website, on which we provide links to adverts for Scottish Government jobs. We are also committed to helping veterans to gain employment in the Scottish Government, and we have a proud track record on armed forces reservists working in the civil service.
Earlier this month, we launched our working with the business community campaign to help employers to understand the benefits that veterans bring to the workplace. In the past, we have had help directly from the Prince of Wales, now the King, whom I approached personally. We certainly hope to continue that partnership in order to ensure that, by using his influence with some very large employers, we can encourage employers to take on more former members of the armed forces.
Our veterans and their families continue to contribute a huge amount to our society across Scotland. I remain committed to providing the very best support for the entire veterans and armed forces community, and I look forward to hearing contributions from members and responding to them in due course.
Cabinet secretary, can I check whether you moved your motion?
I move,
That the Parliament acknowledges the importance of Scotland’s veterans and Armed Forces community and greatly values the significant contribution that it continues to make to Scotland; recognises the challenges that some veterans can face when transitioning out of the military, particularly in relation to employment; notes the work of the Scottish Government to address these issues and improve the employment prospects of veterans and their families; understands that poor mental and physical health may exacerbate barriers to employment for some veterans, and agrees that the Scottish Government should continue to work in partnership across the Scottish public, private and charitable sectors, and with other devolved administrations and the UK Government, to ensure that the veterans and Armed Forces community receives the best possible support and access to employability, healthcare and other services across Scotland.
15:12
I am grateful that the cabinet secretary decided to move his motion, so that I can move my amendment to it as part of the debate.
I thank the cabinet secretary for using Scottish Government time to bring the debate to the chamber. Although the cabinet secretary and I have many differences, I think that we share the belief that we served in the best parts of the armed forces in the world.
I am pleased that the cabinet secretary has listened to calls from members to hold separate debates on remembrance and on support for services in our armed forces community. The subjects are interlinked, but they are both distinct in their own right and merit their own separate debates—long may that continue.
I pay tribute to our armed forces community for everything that they do for this country. They contribute not only on the front line but sometimes close to home, as we saw during the pandemic. That is why I believe that local authorities should always celebrate armed forces day—something that, I note with sadness, Highland Council has forgotten to do for a while; I will raise the matter with it.
We must remember that a lot of the good that our armed forces do is hidden and goes unnoticed. We should never forget, for example, the very strong ties that bases develop with their local communities. We have only to look at RAF Lossiemouth, which hosts activities such as the local community amateur dramatics club, and at the fact that it was prepared to shift its fence to allow the establishment of a medical practice. RAF Kinloss also plays a large part in the local communities by promoting good causes. We should also never forget that the army at Fort George provides training facilities for the best football club in Scotland: Inverness Caledonian Thistle. Those are the hidden contributions that embed our armed forces into their communities.
Our servicemen are always here for us, so we should make sure that we support them in return. As we should never forget, they are prepared to give their all for our freedom, so it is only right that we are prepared to support our veterans when it comes to health, housing and employment. After all, that is only a small price to pay, and it is worth every penny.
That is why I welcome the combined approach that has been taken by the UK Government and the three devolved Governments to create a joint strategy for our veterans. That collective effort deserves praise and shows how working together can bring about serious progress. We have reached the halfway point of that 10-year strategy, so now is a good time to reflect on its achievements.
In recent years, we have seen the promotion of modern apprenticeships to early service leavers, providing them with vital new skills and career opportunities; the tackling of disadvantages that veterans and families face when they require social housing; and more investment in the Scottish veterans fund, which is crucial for charities that deliver support to our armed service personnel. Credit must be given to the Scottish Government for the part that it has played. All Governments have played a part in that work, and all areas of the work have progressed well. The UK Government has introduced relief on national insurance contributions for employers who take on veterans in their first 12 months post-service. That is good news. The UK Government has also just launched a review of welfare provisions for veterans, to identify any gaps in or duplication of support.
Of course, all those actions are built on the principles of the armed services covenant, which the Scottish Conservatives propose should be enshrined in Scottish law. Doing so would be right, because it would enhance the support that is given to veterans and their families, whether it relates to access to education, securing a home, building a new career or receiving the right healthcare. There is always much more that can be done, and that is what we should strive to do. That point was made to me recently when I met the Scottish veterans commissioner.
Homelessness remains a huge challenge. The latest figures show that 640 veterans across Scotland have been assessed as homeless , which is truly shameful. No one should be without a home, especially those who have been prepared to sacrifice everything to protect our country. I am encouraged that the UK Government is delivering a further £8.5 million of funding to end veterans’ homelessness in England in 2023. I would like the Scottish Government to make a similarly strong commitment, because I am not convinced that the refreshed veterans strategy goes far enough in that area.
Can Edward Mountain state the number of veterans who are homeless as a proportion of the general population? His speech is very much like a UK Government speech. Should the work that the UK Government is doing in relation to veterans result in consequentials coming to Scotland for that work? After all, the work is being done. In this Parliament, we have no statutory responsibility for veterans, so we choose to spend the money that we spend. Should we not also get the consequentials?
It is typical of a marine to try and ambush me, and he has probably done it quite successfully. I cannot give him the exact number of veterans who are homeless as compared with other members of the public who are homeless. I believe that it is everyone’s responsibility to resolve that homelessness, and that any help that the UK Government could give the Scottish Government should be given, because it is vital that we ensure that veterans are not homeless. I am happy to campaign with the cabinet secretary on that point if he wants me to.
Will the member take an intervention?
Presiding Officer, do I have time to take another intervention?
Yes—there is time in hand.
This is not meant as a criticism, but surely one homeless veteran in Scotland is one homeless veteran too many.
The simple answer is yes, because every veteran should have a home or access to home. I believe that it is wrong if they do not, so the answer is, simply, yes.
More work can be done on healthcare provision. I recognise that good work has been achieved in that area, with the creation of veterans champions as points of contact in national health service boards, but it is a difficult issue, and we need to make it better.
Certainly, when I was discharged, my medical records never followed me anywhere, which was not to my advantage. It is not to the advantage of any soldier if their medical records cannot be made available to their general practitioner. There may be times when items on those medical records need to be removed, from a security point of view, but, in principle, medical records should follow veterans.
The champions in NHS boards are supported by the Armed Forces Covenant Fund Trust, which, I am pleased to say, was able to extend funding for veterans champions through to March 2024. However, there are big questions about what will happen beyond that date, and it would be good if in his closing speech the cabinet secretary could say what long-term support the Scottish Government can offer to ensure the continuation of that vital scheme.
Members will be aware that, in previous debates, I have called for an end to the threat of repeated inquiries into historical allegations of abuse. I have raised the case of Dennis Hutchings from my regiment. I will not talk in detail about that today, but I will leave everyone with this simple question: is it right that elderly and terminally-ill veterans are hauled before courts to face legal action over the decisions that they made to defend the country and its freedoms? Are we comfortable that they may well die facing those court trials, as Dennis Hutchings did? I add only that we should never underestimate the dangers that our servicemen and women face, and we should never forget that they are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice.
For that reason, as a country, we owe them a debt of gratitude, and we should look after them when they have completed their service and as they return to civilian life. That moral obligation falls upon all Governments across the United Kingdom. We are five years into a 10-year strategy, and I believe that there is still work for this Government to do. However, it has made a commendable start and, for that, I give it credit.
I move amendment S6M-08332.1, to insert at end:
“, and notes the importance of the close working relationships between Armed Forces bases and their respective local authorities, allowing for the potential development of improved social, health, educational and employment opportunities for service families and the communities that they live in.”
15:22
I am pleased to open the debate for the Labour Party. I thank the cabinet secretary for the valuable opportunity to speak on a matter that all of us in the chamber must be passionate about: the support of veterans and their families in any way that is practical and necessary. In that spirit, Labour will support the Government’s motion this evening.
It is Labour’s view that the qualifications, skills and experience of service leavers and veterans, whether reserve or regular, are undervalued and poorly recognised. The Scottish Government has a duty to right that wrong and indignity. Despite the unique impacts that the pandemic and the cost of living crisis have had on many veterans, and the laudable efforts of the Government to make progress, there is much more that needs to be done. Part of the reason why we are having this debate today is to put in place tailored support and to increase the funding to ensure that there is the capacity in our country to meet the scale of the challenge.
All of us who feel passionately about supporting veterans must do more to promote the proper use of the term, particularly among early service leavers. Often, early service leavers or reservists, or those who have left under difficult circumstances, struggle or are reluctant to identify themselves as veterans. They are entitled to identify themselves as veterans, whether they serve for decades with an illustrious career or undertake simply one day of basic training.
When the Scottish Government announced that it would include a question in the 2022 census about service in the armed forces, that was very welcome, as it will give advocacy organisations and others engaged in those issues tangible data from which to direct their outreach work. I hope that the cabinet secretary might be able to confirm when that data will be available.
I turn to a celebration of the work that is already being done on support for veterans and their families, in employment and in other areas. It is important to acknowledge that much good work is already being done to support ex-service personnel to take up employment in the civilian world. Large organisations such as Barclays, the FDM Group and Network Rail have dedicated programmes for ex-service personnel to support the transition from armed forces working environments to a civilian working environment.
Many other businesses, organisations and local authorities have committed to the armed forces covenant to treat personnel, veterans and their families fairly, and I put on record my admiration for those who signed that important pledge and, most important, who adhere to those values.
Labour supports establishing clear statutory targets to underpin delivery of the armed forces covenant, to provide a central focal point for supporting the anecdotal evidence that we have of good practice.
The organisations undertaking that work know that we, in Parliament, also understand that veterans and their families bring admirable qualities and values that they learned in the armed forces community and apply them to their work, to the benefit of all with whom they come into contact. If they are provided with the right support and transitionary training, veterans and their family members are worth their weight in gold and are some of our best citizens.
I recently visited RAF Lossiemouth and the garrison at Leuchars. The big issue that was raised, which Jamie Greene has alluded to, was that supporting those who are still serving to maintain their position with the resilience of their families around them is critical as well. That requires greater liaison between the Scottish Government, local authorities and the Ministry of Defence to ensure that there is an adequate supply of housing, that childcare facilities are available and that there is support for things such as starting up a business or contact with local professions, so that those families are engaged and integrated into the local community.
In Glasgow, SSAFA and Glasgow City Council jointly support the activity of Glasgow’s Helping Heroes. Since 2010, that organisation has provided a holistic service that provides advice and support on matters such as housing and homelessness, employability and training, financial issues, welfare benefits and health issues. I have witnessed at first hand the wonderful work of Rachel Tribble and her team, which is so transformative for service users. It is no exaggeration to say that their work can greatly improve, and even save, lives.
On Tuesday evening, it was my great pleasure to host SSAFA and Glasgow’s Helping Heroes here in the Parliament to celebrate their work and consider the evaluation report that was commissioned as part of Glasgow Helping Heroes’ 10th anniversary. The report, “GHH: A Vital Service—Enabling our Armed Forces community to thrive”, confirms that the social return on investment in such services is enormous and tangible. Researchers from the University of Stirling and Glasgow Caledonian University concluded that, for every £1 that was invested in the Glasgow’s Helping Heroes service, the social value of the result was £6.63. That figure reflects the time when Covid-19 restrictions were in place. It is estimated that, in normal times, the return could be as much as £11.68—an amazing return on investment, and something that we should look at as a national exemplar. That is why I ask the cabinet secretary and members across the chamber to support the amendment in my name.
Veterans and their families are not any more likely to struggle with unemployment than are those in wider society, but it is undeniable that they face unique challenges when working on civvy street. The holistic approach to support that is modelled by Glasgow’s Helping Heroes ensures that all those who are in our armed forces communities can thrive and continue to make our workplaces more diverse and ever more successful.
I move amendment S6M-08332.2, to insert at end:
“, and calls on the Scottish Government to enhance tailored support services available to veterans by scaling up examples of successful models, such as the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association and Glasgow City Council’s Glasgow’s Helping Heroes service, to become national standards.”
We move to the open debate. I advise members that there is quite a bit of time in hand, should they wish to make additional points or take interventions.
15:27
It is rare indeed, Presiding Officer, to be encouraged to avoid brevity.
As Edward Mountain did, I warmly welcome today’s debate. As a Parliament, we have established a pattern of having general debates about the armed forces and veterans community and its needs. We expand on those perhaps only when we consider the content of occasional reports by the Scottish Veterans Commissioner, so having the chance to drill down into a particular and key aspect of all this is quite useful.
I speak from a deeply personal perspective because, two years on from the end of my tenure as veterans minister, I retain a keen interest in all matters relating to the armed forces and veterans community.
I very much look forward to interrogating the progress that has been made regarding the employment of the 2,000 or so serving personnel who leave the military and settle in Scotland each year, not to mention their families. That progress is entirely down to partnership working between local and national Government, the public and private sectors and our veterans charities. However, let us be candid: progress in their employment is not just about doing right by those groups. If we are honest, we know that it is also about exploiting a talent source that none of us can afford to ignore. I am all for acknowledging publicly the employers that make a virtue of recruiting from the armed forces community, but we should be clear that they do so not out of altruism but because they recognise that they are sourcing from a skilled and reliable employment pool.
A few years ago, BT conducted a survey of its workforce. It looked at the attributes of the veterans cohort as set against those of the wider workforce. It was discovered that the former had a 40 per cent better attendance record. Well done to the firms and organisations that have a track record in this area, but let us see their involvement for what it is: a reflection of the employability of the individuals who are being produced by the services. What we need is more businesses and organisations in the public and private sectors evangelising on the benefits of hiring from the forces. I know that the Scottish Government is actively encouraging that.
Having said all that, let me pay tribute to the employers who have looked beyond those who are leaving the services and sought to provide employment opportunities to spouses and partners of serving personnel. Barclays is a fine example of such employers. It can be extremely difficult for those spouses and partners to find worthwhile jobs when they have had to leave behind family support networks and have childcare responsibilities to consider.
Of all the visits that I made during my tenure as veterans minister, few left as lasting an impression as those that involved meeting the partners and spouses of serving personnel, be that at Faslane or the self-help Can Do hub at Leuchars. If we owe our servicemen and servicewomen every assistance to secure gainful employment when they move on, our obligation to their spouses and partners while they remain in service is no less.
That is why I very much welcome the continuing positive relationship between the Scottish Government and the Forces Families Federation and the on-going involvement with the Forces Families Jobs website. The federation, as many of us here will know, does sterling work in promoting and advocating for the people it represents.
I am pleased to note the way in which a particular Scottish Government initiative has morphed since 2018. That concerns work designed to make it easier for employers and educational institutions to recognise the skills and expertise of those leaving the forces. Initially, that took the form of giving military—specifically infantry—qualifications a civilian translation. That served those affected well, but a more holistic approach has been developed. We now have the SCQF military skills and qualification discovery tool, which the cabinet secretary referred to earlier, and I think that I am right in saying that it now covers 45 job roles, all told.
In relation to Martin Whitfield’s earlier question, I should acknowledge the clear progress that has been made by the Army, for example, on career development work and on furnishing its personnel with formal qualifications that will aid them when it comes to finding work when they leave. The Army has, historically, been lax in that regard, perhaps fearful that providing such qualifications would encourage people to leave at a time when retention and recruitment remains a very big issue. However, on a recent visit to Leuchars Station—the same one that Paul Sweeney made—I was very heartened to hear directly from serving personnel about the qualification opportunities and, indeed, the encouragement that they were receiving to go for those qualifications.
Returning to the subject of morphing, I note that the veterans employability strategic group has also undergone considerable change since the cabinet secretary established it in 2017. Not the least significant change was the adoption of a new co-chair approach, which involved the appointment of Sue Bomphray, who was then a human resources director at Barclays. As Keith Brown’s successor, I made that appointment, having been hugely impressed by the work that Sue had led at Barclays on employing veterans and, just as important, their spouses. The ambition was to get more private sector employers involved, not just those from the public and third sectors. I hope that, in his closing remarks, the cabinet secretary might be able to tell us about the progress that the VESG has led. Otherwise, I am going to regret highlighting my role in the changes that I have noted.
One of the limited number of positives to come out of the pandemic was that the Scottish Government, as an institution, saw up close just how multiskilled our armed forces are. I well recall meeting a group of army logistics experts operating out of St Andrews House who had been drafted in to support the NHS in the distribution of key items. When chatting to the team, I encouraged them not to compromise on their “can do” attitude and approach when they went out into the field, which they did not. The impression that they left has been tangible. For example, I understand that, since 2021, about 50 veterans have joined the Government’s staff ranks. That is welcome, and there is clearly scope to build on it, but the more that cohort’s talents are experienced at first hand, the more, I suspect, it will be seen as an employment pool worthy of fishing in.
That also goes for employers way beyond the Scottish Government, so I am pleased to see the Government fulfilling its programme for government commitment to improve employment opportunities for serving personnel when their time in the forces ends, with a particular focus on the small and medium-sized enterprise sector, because it is not just large companies and organisations that would benefit from employing those individuals.
We have made progress on improving the employment offering for spouses of serving personnel and veterans, but there is more to do.
15:34
I begin by echoing the words of my colleague Edward Mountain and the cabinet secretary about the sacrifices made by veterans and their families and by recognising their service. Our brave servicemen and servicewomen make immense sacrifices to keep our country safe and secure. They serve our nation with honour and distinction, and it is our duty to ensure that they are provided with the best possible support upon their return to civilian life. We owe them a debt that can never be repaid in full.
We must make every effort to give the 250,000 veterans who live in Scotland all the support that they deserve. A key area of support relates to employment, as many veterans struggle to find work when they leave the armed forces, despite having a wealth of skills and experience. That is especially true for those who have been injured—whether physically or mentally—in the line of duty. Since 2021, the UK Government has granted employers 12 months’ relief on national insurance contributions when they take on new veterans. I welcome the work between the UK and Scottish Governments in the area of employment.
The joint strategy for our veterans, which was launched in 2018, is a great example of what can be achieved when both of Scotland’s Governments work together constructively on things that really matter. As Chris Hughes of Veterans Scotland said at the time,
“It was particularly refreshing to see the governments across the United Kingdom come together to take collective ownership of the strategy and put the needs of the veterans community before party politics, an achievement that has been widely applauded by stakeholders.”
The joint strategy will run for 10 years. It has already been effective, although, as we all acknowledge, we must continue to update and refresh it as new evidence is gathered. In that light, it was positive to see the cabinet secretary update the action plan for veterans last August—I expect that he will keep it under continual review.
The strategy has several strands, and one of the key themes is supporting veterans into employment and furthering the career opportunities that are available to them. The Scottish and UK Governments have progressed that key aim by working in collaboration where possible.
A strong and positive example has been set by Skills Development Scotland’s collaboration with the MOD, which supports career transitions and increases career guidance for armed services personnel who are entering their resettlement period. I am keen to see the Scottish and UK Governments explore other areas in which they can work together, especially in respect of employment opportunities. Indeed, I would support any initiatives that involve further collaboration of that nature.
In my parliamentary region of West Scotland, good examples exist of projects that bring together public sector organisations that seek to help veterans. I refer to a joint initiative between the University of the West of Scotland, NHS Lanarkshire and St John and Red Cross Defence Medical Welfare Service, which is a charity that provides medical welfare to people who operate on the front line, whether that be in the military, the police service or the health service. That initiative was awarded a grant to examine how welfare support and technology can benefit isolated veterans.
The UK Government recently announced that the project would share funding of £5 million with 22 other projects—all with the goal of driving forward cutting-edge treatments and technologies to support veterans’ healthcare. The projects have been launched to help the physical and mental health of veterans. It is a great achievement for the University of the West of Scotland to gain funding for that kind of innovative research. Recently, I had the privilege of visiting the university’s main Paisley campus to speak with some impressive young journalism students, which made me feel very old indeed.
It was encouraging, too, to see the UK Government launch, at the beginning of this month, a review into welfare provision for veterans. The review seeks to identify gaps in support in order to better align the workings of a range of support services with the needs of the veteran community, and it aims to enhance the quality of the services that veterans receive. I look forward to the outcome of the review, which I am confident will improve the current system for veterans and their families.
My party has proposed the introduction of a new top-up benefit to support veterans in receipt of universal credit, using the devolved welfare powers that the Scottish Parliament now has. We believe that that benefit should be provided alongside an armed forces and veterans bill, which should further enshrine the voluntary armed forces covenant into law and guarantee access to a variety of key services.
Scotland has long played a pivotal and proud role in UK military history. As I have said, we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to our servicemen and servicewomen. Saying that is the easy part, but our gratitude must extend beyond warm words into firm actions, some of which I have touched on. It is commendable that the UK and Scottish Governments are focused on working together to uphold our commitment to veterans, and I hope to see that continue. I am pleased to support the Government’s motion and the amendment in the name of Edward Mountain.
15:40
I am privileged to have in my constituency Glencorse barracks, in Penicuik, which is the home of 2 Scots, the second battalion of the Royal Regiment of Scotland. Across the road and up the hill from that, there are army homes in Milton Bridge. I have visited both and, in due course, I will refer to the meeting that I had with the wives and partners and will speak about the issues that they face. I agree with the cabinet secretary that their support is essential in sustaining the morale of our service personnel.
The first, though obvious, observation to make is that the term “veterans” embraces many different people: those who have had short service careers; those who are long serving; those who have been on the front line in places of conflict and combat, peacekeeping; and those who have not. There are those who live alone and others who live with parents or partners and have parental responsibilities. There are those who have suffered life-changing injuries and those with combat stress. That list is not exhaustive; therefore, one size does not fit all, but there are common experiences.
First, I will touch on the issue of data, which is not a boring topic but is fundamental to identifying the breadth of the challenges and meeting them. I note that, for the first time, in the Scottish 2022 census, there was a question about previous experience in the armed forces. I understand that that information has yet to be published, but it will be very useful. We know that our servicemen and servicewomen face particular challenges as they re-enter the civilian community. Living and working in a culture of conformity, structure, obedience, rank and service tours that take them away for months on end, and where access to housing and healthcare is provided while income is guaranteed, all contrasts starkly with life in a civilian community.
They go from tours that take them away from family, partners and friends to the world of the civilian, in which decisions and choices that perhaps were previously made for them now have to be made by them. They are home most of the time; they have to make their own health provision, find work and fit in. The comradeship that came with the job may be distant, and they have to make new social ties. That is not just hard for them, it is often very hard for their families. Their partner or wife will have run a household without them for months on end, making all the day-to-day decisions, even when they were on leave. There have to be adjustments all round—that is true for any children, too. They have to fit back into a domestic household that functioned quite well without them. If they have returned from some horror overseas, that has to be factored in.
Christine Grahame has made some valid points. Does she recognise that one of the most challenged cohorts is single early service leavers? I would contend that that is a growing issue for us to address.
Indeed. I tried to cover most things, but my list was not exhaustive.
Of course, funding to provide routes to adjustment helps, as well as person-to-person support. I note that, between 2020 and 2023, £750,000 was allocated to support work in health, wellbeing and quality of life, which has been expanded to include all veterans over 60 instead of 65.
I will dedicate the rest of my speaking time to veterans’ partners and families—especially those in which there are children. After all, wherever a father, mother or partner goes, children often have to follow, which means changing homes and schools and adapting to yet another community. I have to say, though, that Penicuik—both the schools and the community at large—has welcomed those stationed at Glencorse. Indeed, when the barracks was threatened with closure by the MOD, the community rallied round to save it, and it has been reprieved.
It is difficult for a wife or partner to hold down a career when they are on the move. Children, too, may find that, within months of settling in one school, they are off to another. When I met wives and partners of servicemen from Glencorse, I was made very aware of the restrictions on their lives—which, to be clear, they accept without complaint. They also support each other, especially when a partner is being sent on a long tour to a difficult part of the world. Yet, apart from setting up online businesses, the mobility of their partners prevented them, in many ways, from following careers.
That must mean that, eventually, when their armed forces partners end their final tour of duty, even more huge adjustments have to be made all round. On discharge, a home has to be found and a GP registered with. I note the reference that the cabinet secretary and Edward Mountain made to the importance of the MOD ensuring that medical records are transferred promptly. There are also the issues of schools and, not least, employment to be dealt with. All of that must be done while two people—let alone any children—have to get used to being with each other 24/7.
For some, that transition simply does not work. There can be marriage and relationship break-ups, with all the fallout that can be predicted. Some turn to alcohol and, indeed, drugs, which, for some, can lead, in time, to homelessness and even imprisonment. Lack of employment can be a major component of that. Veterans have skills that can be carried over into civilian life, which should be utilised. There are staff in the Parliament, especially in security roles, who have a background in military service.
Our veterans make that huge adjustment to civilian life. It is not only essential but just that we help them, given the job that they have done on our behalf, which might have involved seeing dreadful sights that they will carry with them throughout their lives.
I know that, to an extent, the cabinet secretary has already addressed this, but I ask him to set out, in his summing-up speech, how support is extended to our veterans’ immediate family—the parents, the partners, the wives and the children—when that transition becomes a reality, given all the challenges—private, personal and public—that I have touched on, which will undoubtedly follow.
15:46
I am proud to speak in this afternoon’s debate, which honours our veterans and their families and which seeks to advance their important contribution to communities across our nation. It is an important and necessary debate on employment support for veterans, and I speak in support of my Labour colleague Paul Sweeney’s amendment. I agree with much that he, the cabinet secretary and every member who has spoken so far have said.
Over many years, our service personnel have been delivering security for the people of Scotland and the UK at home and overseas. I doubt that any of us would dispute that those who have served our country so well deserve the very best support as they make the transition back into civilian life.
As well as addressing their well-documented healthcare and housing needs, these days, we increasingly need to support veterans into employment opportunities. As Poppyscotland and others have highlighted, most veterans are no longer at retirement age when they leave the armed forces, so ensuring that our armed forces personnel have support and assistance to transition into employment is vital. It is important that that journey is started and enabled as early as possible in the resettlement process—that is important, first and foremost, for the individuals involved, as well as their families.
As we have heard, transitioning to civilian life can be difficult and disorientating for veterans, especially if they are also learning to live with physical or mental injuries. Employment is therefore vital for reintegration and mental health. It provides meaning and a sense of purpose, structure and routine in one’s life. Just as important is paying the bills. We must recognise that the current cost of living crisis will be having a particular impact on our veterans.
Veterans have an enormous social and economic contribution to make to our communities, and we have a moral obligation to those who have protected us and our families to ensure that we honour the moral contract that we have with them and their families during transition and beyond.
Like Russell Findlay, I represent West Scotland, and I am privileged to have in my region many examples of civil society organisations that work to honour and support our veterans. Erskine, Scotland’s largest veterans charity, has been caring for veterans across Scotland since 1916. Through its care homes, veterans village and activities centre, Erskine offers a very special blend of dedicated care, compassion and understanding to residents and their families.
I have been proud to visit the organisation on a number of occasions, and I have been incredibly fortunate to meet many of its residents and staff, who are led ably by Ian Cumming. In return, I was delighted to show a group of veterans around the Parliament building and the chamber just a few weeks ago.
Renfrewshire is also home to a remarkable new social enterprise that is blazing a trail for veterans’ employability. Scotland’s Bravest Manufacturing Company is a division of Royal British Legion Industries. Its factory is commercially viable and produces signs, panels, and high-quality digital printing while providing opportunities for many, including veterans who are learning to live with an injury or disability. I have seen that enterprise for myself, as I know a number of other members have. It is truly inspiring, and it is a model that I hope can be replicated across industry and across the country. There are other examples of great work being done by organisations, and I commend them all.
However, all is not well. Caring for our veterans cannot be left to civil society alone. If a Government’s first duty is to protect its citizens, its next duty must be to protect and honour the men and women who do the protecting. It is unacceptable that many veterans continue to experience difficulty in accessing employment and skills development.
Mr Bibby used the word “duty”. For the Scottish Government, that is a largely moral duty, although we have some degree of legal duty in relation to the covenant. If Mr Bibby thinks that we have a legal or statutory duty, is he willing to join Edward Mountain and me in saying to the UK Government that we need the consequential funding to provide further services for veterans?
I will come to that, and I will be happy to look into the issue of funding. If we have legal duties, there must be funding to go with those.
As Graeme Dey did, we must recognise the role that our armed forces played in the pandemic, while also recognising the significant impact that the pandemic had on many veterans. It is incumbent upon both the Scottish and UK Governments to ensure that veterans have the support they need. I commend the employability initiatives and other actions set out by the Scottish Government in November last year. However, I note that many employability initiatives are delivered through local employability partnerships at local authority level and that the appalling cuts inflicted upon councils by last month’s budget therefore appear to represent a lack of joined-up thinking.
We must consider other practical issues, such as the childcare that Jamie Greene mentioned at the start of the debate. We must also connect our veterans to public transport. On a practical note, the bus stop at Erskine veterans village has been moved too far away for many residents and visitors to comfortably be able to reach it. My constituent James Gillies has raised that issue with me. It highlights the deficiencies in our bus services and the need for people to have not only bus passes but buses on which they can use them. I hope that the bus companies involved will reconsider what is happening there
Meanwhile, over the past 13 years, the UK Government has broken too many of its promises to our veterans, as has been repeatedly highlighted by Johnny Mercer MP. Waiting time targets for veterans’ mental health support have been missed, there has been a failure to deliver identity cards to speed up access to vital services, and many former forces personnel report negative experiences when claiming compensation.
The Armed Forces Act 2021 places a legal duty to deliver the armed forces covenant on all manner of public bodies, but many veterans I speak to feel that it lets UK Government ministers off the hook. Scottish Labour, in contrast, supports establishing clear statutory targets to underpin delivery of the armed forces covenant. A future UK Labour Government will fully incorporate the armed forces covenant into law and will scrap visa fees for non-UK veterans and their families after four years of service. Labour has also launched a UK-wide listening campaign called veterans’ voices.
Above all, we must work with veterans to ensure that they receive the employability and other support that they deserve. By ensuring that at both Scottish and UK Government levels, we will fulfil the sacred moral contract that our society makes with those who serve.
15:54
I, too, am pleased to speak in this afternoon’s debate, which acknowledges the significant contribution that veterans make on their return to civilian life following service in our military.
Men and women leave the military for different reasons, including injury, ill health, personal circumstances and completion of their service. For many, their circumstances are such that they can consider and embark on a new work life. By virtue of their training, job roles and experiences, many service leavers return with invaluable skills, qualifications and knowledge, including as mechanics, engineers, doctors, plumbers and lawyers. Leavers also have highly developed personal skills in areas such as effective communication, problem solving, team working and leadership, all of which are transferable into new and fulfilling work roles that will benefit not only them and their families but their communities and the local economy.
Underpinning a successful transition are the people who stand beside service leavers—their families, who have also, essentially, served their country. Partners are an important protective factor as they can provide emotional, practical and financial help while service leavers consider their next steps.
However, we know that, for some, transition can be very difficult. Compromised mental and physical health, alcohol use, domestic abuse, personal debt and even grievance are well-documented vulnerability factors that can take their toll at a time of great change. An added vulnerability factor for many is the current cost of living crisis, as members have mentioned. I am pleased that the Scottish Government veterans fund, which has supported a range of fantastic projects for veterans over a number of years, has been doubled this year to ensure that veterans and their families have the support that they need.
The extent to which employment support has developed in recent years is welcome. I am pleased that the veterans employability strategic group now has membership from the private sector. That is an important step in recognising the benefits of employing veterans, not least as we grapple with labour shortages across Scotland.
The energy sector is one of the fastest-growing sectors in our economy and it already offers many employment opportunities that are suited to former and transitioning military personnel. According to Dr Alix Thom, workforce engagement and skills manager for Offshore Energies UK, the energy sector provides highly skilled and well-rewarded employment opportunities. To meet its future commitments, the sector is already working to match industry job profiles with military roles, identifying transferable positions and training and conversion opportunities.
Energy firms are increasingly recognising the benefits of recruiting men and women from the armed forces. Team leadership qualities, organisational skills and technical knowledge are all highly prized by the sector, and career opportunities exist in the fields of engineering, project management, health and safety, and the skilled trades.
In my constituency in the north-east, I regularly speak to energy sector businesses that are actively recruiting a broad range of talent and skills in an extremely competitive labour market, and our veteran community has a strong contribution to make to our Scottish renewables industry. Earlier this week, when I visited the newly-constructed south harbour in my constituency, I heard that the Port of Aberdeen proactively promotes employment opportunities to groups that represent military veterans.
Another sector that is actively recruiting veterans is the cyber space. Cybersecurity is a growing industry, with cyberattacks becoming a growing concern for businesses in all sectors, and Scotland is not exempt from that. The security training, experience and skills that service leavers have make them ideal candidates for a range of cyber and information security roles. There are clear parallels given that cybersecurity requires analysis of threats and vulnerabilities. Veterans live and breathe security, and they may also have personal and professional qualities that lend themselves to such roles.
The member makes some good points, and I would like to develop her theme about particular talents. Keith Brown and I met people from RM Condor, which is home to 45 Commando group. It has emerged that the talents around health and safety that those people have because of the work that they carry out can translate into civilian life, as can their experience in relation to mental health support, which they have got because of their trauma risk management—TRiM—training. Will the member acknowledge that point?
I absolutely agree with Mr Dey that veterans bring with them not only professional experience but many personal attributes, such as those that he has highlighted.
Some veterans will also have existing security clearances and leave the military with information technology and cybersecurity qualifications that mean that they can literally walk into a new role.
Those are only two examples of sectors that benefit from our veteran community, and I am acutely aware that pathways to employment can still be challenging for many service leavers. I was pleased to hear about the range of employment support that was outlined by the cabinet secretary earlier. I am proud of Scotland’s long tradition of supporting a place for veterans across education, housing, healthcare and employment. However, we all know that there is much more to do.
We owe our veterans a huge debt of gratitude. As such, it is incumbent on us to do everything that we can to ensure that they can access the support, training and education that they need. As a member of a military family, I will certainly do my bit within that.
I call Jamie Greene to speak for a generous six minutes.
16:01
That is very generous, Deputy Presiding Officer.
I thank the cabinet secretary and all members who have contributed thus far in what I think has been a very good debate. It is not without its politics, but nor should it be—after all, we are in Parliament. It goes without saying that there genuinely is a cross-party sentiment that we owe a great amount of thanks to those who serve our country, those who have served our country and, indeed, those who have made the ultimate sacrifice—not everyone is able to come back and be re-employed or readjust to society, because many do not come home at all.
We also have the great privilege of having among us those who have served. They are represented on two of the front benches, but are also represented among the staff in the Parliament and in many of our constituency and parliamentary offices, where there are people who either have served in the forces or currently serve in the reserves. We owe them all a huge thanks today.
Of course, as we have discussed many times in the chamber, many of us have personal experiences and relationships with the armed forces through friends and family who have served, going as far back as the first and second world wars as well as more recently.
As I was doing some research ahead of today’s debate—well, as my staff were doing some research for me, rummaging through the local papers—some interesting anecdotes and stories came up. I will share with the chamber the story of Tommy McVey, a Greenock pilot who shot down an enemy plane in world war 2. His plane was attacked by a German plane and the other pilot, a 24-year-old man, was fatally injured, leaving Tommy to take control of the plane himself. He managed to do so and made it back home. He survived. He got married. He had a wife and kids—in fact, his nephew is a councillor on Inverclyde Council. However, like so many veterans, he really struggled and carried the weight of that experience with him throughout his life—I think that many veterans do that but do not talk about it.
Of course, those are the wars that occupy our TV channels—the ones that we talk about the most—but not all veterans went to war, and not all veterans who did so were on the front line. Many people who serve do so in places of famine or places of genocide. They perform peacekeeping missions and also work in the aftermath of a huge amount of natural disasters and—as we have learned over the past few years—pandemics. Trauma can actually occur pretty much anywhere. It is met with in many places and in many ways.
I say that because I want to challenge the overused notion of what a veteran is. The stereotype that is often used is someone who is male, war torn, perhaps injured, homeless or suffering from addiction, mental health breakdown or post-traumatic stress disorder and so on. Of course, those issues exist—I will go on to talk about that, too—but I think that anyone who has retired from service and come back into society is a veteran. Any one of those people is a veteran, and many of them go on to have great lives.
Many of them go on to re-employment and opportunities; many of them go on to the private sector, which I will talk about in a second. Many even go back into the forces as reserves, sometimes part time but often full time, going back to use the skills that they developed. They are all veterans, too—so much so that there are estimates of there being around 250,000 veterans in Scotland.
When we brush away the politics, we have heard today that both of Scotland’s Governments have been working together constructively—directly on a ministerial level and through the civil service, which is important. They will not always get it right and those relationships are not always perfect, but it is only if the national Governments at both levels as well as local government get involved that we can truly paint a picture of improving outcomes.
I have name checked the UK Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, Mr Johnny Mercer, in the chamber before. I should probably also mention his wife, who has often got quite a lot to say. It is important that there are role models and that people have loud voices and are not afraid to use them, even within their parties and Governments. We should have more of that in politics.
Will Jamie Greene take an intervention?
Yes—in one second, as I want to make a point.
The reason why it is so important is that, since 2001, an estimated 2,000 former soldiers or veterans are believed to have taken their own lives. That is a stark statistic. I wanted to mention it because, although our understanding of mental health and PTSD has improved over the years, those numbers are still depressingly high.
I will quickly intervene on two of the points that Jamie Greene raised.
I heard what he said about the two Governments working together, but I have never known intergovernmental relationships to be as bad as they are now. I have met with every previous secretary of state over the decade that I have been doing this. The current one refuses to meet. I have had people ignoring letters and not meeting me across the board. That is a counterpoint to the fact that, as Jamie Greene said, some good work is being done between the Governments.
The definition of a veteran is someone who has served even for half a day. Martin Whitfield was right when he said that every person who is homeless is one too many. The point that I was making in relation to homelessness, which Jamie Greene mentioned, is that, whether we are talking about homelessness, mental health issues or imprisonment, veterans are not overrepresented in those categories compared to the general population. The horrible notion of their being mad, bad and sad is not true. Many veterans—the majority—successfully transition to civilian life.
I can give you that time back, Mr Greene.
I appreciate that.
The cabinet secretary makes two very important points, which I would like to reflect on. If it is the case that members of the Scottish Government are struggling to get appropriate communication from their counterparts in the UK Government, Keith Brown is right to raise that. It is also right that we feed that back in any way that we can. I am not a member of the UK Government, but it has a building up the road, and I am very happy to feed that back through any channels that I have. I agree with the cabinet secretary that that is not appropriate or respectful.
The second point was about the issue of overrepresentation of veterans in states of distress, including homelessness. I am not hearing anyone on our benches making the argument that they are overrepresented, but they are there. I think that the estimate was that there were more than 600 homeless veterans last year, and one is too many. I appreciate that the cabinet secretary may not have a statutory duty to look after homeless veterans, but he has a statutory duty to look after homeless people; ultimately, they are citizens of this country whether or not they are a veteran. It is in that vein that I would like him to reflect on that point.
I could probably go on for another six minutes—there is so much more to say—but the issue of employment is the crux of the debate. The question is not why someone would employ a veteran, but why they would not. That is the point that Graeme Dey made. We are seeing a bit of a brain drain from many of the armed forces, because many people are seeing better terms and conditions in the private sector. Many have been attracted to contractors and private companies—even going to work for those contractors in the bases and on the premises where they once served. They are disappearing out of one end and coming back in at another. There is nothing wrong with that; it is good. It may offer them better opportunities as they move on in the future, but it creates a bit of a struggle in getting people in the door of our armed forces.
We have talked a lot about families and children, which is also an important issue. I will reflect on my visits in relation to that. I have now had a few visits to RAF Lossiemouth and to Faslane, and, when we talk to the families and spouses of serving members of the forces, the big issue that they struggle with is getting local employment that matches their career paths, which they have probably had to put on hold or, in some cases, give up entirely. Someone cannot do the same job, like for like, in Inverness as they could in London, for example.
They are also struggling with childcare, which is a devolved issue. The provision of local childcare might be a matter for local authorities but, when a community has an influx of thousands of people, it creates problems with access to health services, education and childcare. The crux of the Scottish Conservatives’ amendment is that we should look at the issue as a whole and ensure that local authorities are a big part of the solution and not a big part of the problem.
I will close my contribution on this note. We are on the right track. I am encouraged by the tone of the debate, but I take on board the cabinet secretary’s points on his difficulty in interacting with the UK Government. I hope that the situation will improve. If it does not, I ask him to come and talk to Conservative members here who might be able to help with that if we can. Our veterans deserve nothing less—in fact, they deserve a whole lot more.
16:10
I, too, acknowledge the importance of our veterans and armed forces and note their contribution to Scotland and the wider world. I associate myself with Jamie Greene’s comments on the wide understanding of what veterans are and the extent of their contribution to the world. As other members have done, I pay my respects to veterans who have been injured or who have lost their lives in conflict or subsequently as a result of the impacts of their work.
Last year, we debated the mental health needs of veterans. At that time, I said that we should look at supporting our veterans more holistically and do more to ensure that they have better access to employment and health services. However, we must also ensure that services are cognisant of the fact that transition from a military career creates many challenges in housing, employment and mental and physical health. Therefore I am glad to see the Government securing a debate on veterans’ employment linked to housing, healthcare and multi-organisational support. As the motion suggests, such support for veterans must be co-ordinated and person centred. Only by learning from good practice will we see adequate, widespread support for our veterans. The purpose of Scottish Labour’s amendment is to clarify that we should put in place national standards based on well-evidenced research of veterans’ needs and outcomes to ensure the best possible quality of life for those leaving active service.
On Tuesday evening, I was honoured to attend an event that was sponsored by my colleague Paul Sweeney, which other members also attended. The Glasgow’s helping heroes model provides an easily accessible, needs-led service. Services come together around housing, finance, physical and mental health, and other forms of support that individuals can access at a time that is right for them. As we have heard, the report entitled “GHH: A Vital Service—Enabling our Armed Forces community to thrive” makes important reading, and I encourage members to find it online. The personal stories that are detailed in the report show us the reality of difficult transitions in which people often feel alone, with a sense of confusion about where to turn, and sometimes find themselves unable to ask for help. The research rightly recognised the importance of having co-ordinated services such as GHH in supporting not only individuals but members of the wider community, who can benefit from the existence of such services in their area and can direct people at the time that is right for them.
Every veteran is owed the right support to ensure that they are able to realise their potential and live full and successful lives after service. All members who have contributed to the debate have demonstrated that that is what we want. However, evidence shows that, as happens in many walks of life, social inequality is a predetermining factor in the employment prospects of ex-military service people. Some researchers have suggested that, although high-ranking officers and soldiers are offered similar transition resources, those from the lower ranks find that their opportunities are underpinned by economic, social and structural inequality that has significant effects on transitional employment outcomes.
We must acknowledge that, to ensure that transitional needs are met in key areas such as housing, health and finance, veterans—particularly those from poorer social economic backgrounds—need space to develop their skills and make decisions about their future employment. It is clear to me from having spoken with ex-servicemen and women recently that pathways to employment can be difficult and that it is essential to have an extra layer of advice services, such as under the GHH model.
Will my friend recognise that one of the key aspects of the Glasgow’s helping heroes service that is so powerful is that it is veterans advising veterans, and that their lived experience is often critical? Often, those who are employed and still serving in the armed forces who advise people who are about to leave do not have the same insights as people who have been through the process already.
Yes, it was very clear—and it was powerfully demonstrated in one of the short videos that were shown at the event that I attended—that people’s ability to support one another once they are out in civilian life is invaluable.
I was pleased to attend a local Ayrshire British Legion group breakfast recently. I attended with local Labour councillor colleagues, and I was grateful to members of the British Legion group for explaining to me the transition needs of those returning from active service to civilian life, particularly in a more rural area such as East Ayrshire and South Scotland. I found the stories from family members very revealing, and the work with the individual and their wider support circle struck me as extremely important.
Like other MSPs, I have worked alongside members of our armed forces community during campaigns and outreach down the years. In that time, I have been struck by the deep sense of commitment and dedication that they have, not only to their own home but to the wider community that they live in. We need to capture that.
Many of the charities and community groups that we all work with on a daily basis have people with a forces background at their heart, using the skills that they have learned to better improve the place that they call home. That includes groups such as Veterans First Point Ayrshire and Arran, which provides first-class employment and housing support services, as well as a comfortable environment where those with military backgrounds can share their experiences, which is a very important aspect.
If we can reflect a sense of that commitment today and help to deliver veterans the level of service that they deserve—and I think that the motion and our amendment can achieve that—we will put ourselves on a path towards paying our veterans back, at least in some form, for the service that they have given to our country.
16:17
My constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands has three Army bases within its boundaries, including Dreghorn, Redford infantry barracks and Redford cavalry barracks. In addition, we have Glencorse to the east and to the north the former Army headquarters at Craigiehall, which is currently lying empty.
I have visited the barracks in my constituency on a number of occasions, the most recent one being only a couple of weeks ago, when I met Aramark trainees and apprentices providing hospitality and housekeeping services at Dreghorn barracks. Many of its employees are family members of serving Army personnel, who ensure that Army families have a better standard of living until the time comes for them to transition into civilian life. It is no surprise that companies such as Aramark employ Army family members.
It was found in a recent report by the Army Families Federation, “Military spousal/partner employment”, that
“30% of employers said that military spouse/partners show resilience and determination and 22% said that they are willing to go the extra mile in their work.”
It is estimated that there are 100,000 veterans of working age, with their families, living in Scotland. The average age of those leaving the Army is 29. As a result, they will spend more of their life in civilian employment than in Army life. These are highly trained individuals, who have transferable skills that are often sought after by employers, not only in Edinburgh but across Scotland.
The Scottish Government’s programme for government committed to securing improved opportunities for veterans, and it accepted the recommendations within the Scottish veterans commissioner’s reports on employment, skills and learning, and on housing. That includes ensuring easier access to further learning and training, resulting in the Scottish Government providing additional funds to the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership to develop a skills recognition tool for use on the My World of Work website. That alignment of existing military skills and civilian qualifications should give veterans the best chance to compete for jobs when settling in Scotland.
Improved connections to the business community by the veterans employability strategic group has resulted in membership, for the first time, from private sector employers. That presents an important step towards bridging the gap between public sector policy, service delivery partners and employers—to the improved understanding of the benefit of employing veterans and to ensuring that they find suitable employment. It should also help to reach out to small and medium-sized companies as potential employers or as mentors to veterans who want to start their own business.
The Forces Families Jobs website is a central portal for employment and training opportunities for military spouses and family members. It was launched in 2019. All employers who advertise on that website have signed the armed forces covenant, and a profile is provided for each to explain their commitment to being forces family friendly. The Scottish Government continues to work with Forces Families Jobs to signpost vacancies by directing people to Work For Scotland, the Government’s own job website. In addition, large public employers, from the NHS to Police Scotland, have designated websites or recruitment teams to support the recruitment of veterans.
Many soldiers will face other challenges when they leave the service, but the biggest difficulty that is faced by veterans in Edinburgh, before they can even start to seek employment, is finding a home when they leave the forces. Despite Scotland having some of the strongest homelessness legislation in the world, and all local authorities having a legal duty to provide support to anyone at risk of homelessness, including veterans, there are still housing issues in some parts of the country.
The number of people who live in Edinburgh city has increased by more than 13 per cent, in recent years, which has put substantial pressure on housing waiting lists. During the period from 2007, the Scottish National Party Government invested £558 million in housing grant support in Edinburgh, which contributed to the completion of more than 13,000 affordable homes. Over the five years from 2021, Edinburgh will further benefit from the affordable housing supply programme’s investment of £234 million towards the delivery of even more good-quality affordable homes, which is an increase of £32 million—16 per cent—on the previous five years.
Despite that, the growth of the Edinburgh population is such that we need to make use of all suitable housing to help meet the demand. The MOD, as a landlord, owns hundreds of units of empty service family accommodation in Edinburgh and the Lothians. I have highlighted that issue, over many years, with all the individuals who have held the Westminster defence minister brief. Thankfully, at long last, the MOD has agreed to sell some of those empty properties to the City of Edinburgh Council, starting with an initial batch of 23 of the 78 homes that have lain empty over many years on the Dreghorn estate.
Will the member give way?
I am just finishing. Sorry.
I hope that it will not be long before the other 900 empty MOD homes across Scotland will become available to the 600 homeless veterans and others who require a home. That will go some way to removing one of the barriers that are faced by Army personnel in their transition to civilian life and employment in Scotland.
We move to the final speaker in the open debate, after which we will move to closing speeches. I expect every member who has participated in the debate to be in the chamber for the start of those.
16:23
Presiding Officer, before I begin, I apologise to you, the cabinet secretary and others in the chamber for arriving late to the debate. I meant no disrespect.
I thank Keith Brown for the engagement that we have had on what is an important motion. As others have highlighted, it matters because it acknowledges some major challenges that we perhaps do not often recognise or discuss. Research has shown that working-age veterans are twice as likely as non-veterans to be unemployed, and that many discover a lack—real or perceived—of transferable skills when they come to seek civilian employment. Difficulties in both mental and physical health; housing problems, as we heard from Gordon MacDonald and others; inadequate transition planning by the armed forces; family issues, including schools issues and relationship breakdown; financial problems; and unhelpful public attitudes can all build barriers to successful integration into civilian work.
We celebrate the many ways in which the needs of veterans and their families are being recognised and addressed, including in specific work by GP practices, schools and Social Security Scotland, and by the Armed Services Advice Project. That work, along with the partnerships that the motion highlights, will be essential to ensuring their continuing and enhanced wellbeing.
Some of the challenges that veterans experience arise directly, and entirely understandably, from their deployment in combat or conflict zones. Harmful levels of drinking, violent behaviour, anxiety and depression, as well as post-traumatic stress disorder, are all natural and understandable responses to the horrors of war and its aftermath. In addition, the deployment of special forces means that the UK’s soldiers are involved in more conflict than we might imagine.
However, there are also aspects of military culture that, even here in the UK, in our relative peace, are deeply problematic. Bullying, racism, sexual assault and harassment within the armed forces must be addressed as assiduously as in any other workplace—in fact, especially so, given the lack of employment rights or union representation.
Many people experience fulfilling careers in the armed forces and would recommend the life to others. However, there are others for whom the promise that is held out by contemporary consumer-led military recruitment, of adventure, social mobility, self-fulfilment and camaraderie, brings bitter fruit. Those for whom military life is most damaging, are, overwhelmingly, the very young and those who come from backgrounds of poverty and trauma, who are signed up to serve in the infantry in the most dangerous of roles. In an era of recruitment shortfalls, those are the very young people who are being targeted by increasingly commercial advertising campaigns in both traditional and social media.
In 2021-22, 30 per cent of new recruits to the British Army were aged under 18, and more soldiers were enlisted at 16 than at any other age. The UK is the only country in Europe, the only NATO member and the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council routinely to accept 16-year-old recruits. That policy has been condemned by children’s commissioners in all four nations—
Will the member give way?
Yes.
I thank the member for giving way on that point. We need to be careful when we talk about young people joining the armed services. While they can join the armed services and go through the training before the age of 18, they cannot take part in active service or bear arms until they are 18. Would the member care to acknowledge that fact?
I can give you the time back, Ms Chapman.
I acknowledge that point, but some of the issues that I have spoken about, and the surrounding impacts, mean that some of those 16-year-olds are the most vulnerable and are therefore the most likely to have adverse experiences when they leave the Army, as I will come on to talk about.
The policy has been condemned by children’s commissioners in all four nations, by human rights and faith organisations and by veterans themselves. Those 16-year-olds are likely to experience the worst outcomes throughout their time in the Army—the evidence on that is clear. Many leave before they are 18 and find themselves both out of work and out of education. Most disadvantaged young people now stay on at school or college after 16, but those who leave with the plan of joining the Army rarely return to the education that they left.
If they remain as soldiers, it will probably be in the infantry, where there is a higher likelihood than in any other part of the Army of becoming a casualty, mental or physical, or of death. The younger they are, the more adverse childhood experiences they have already had, and the earlier they leave, the more likely it is that the experience of initial training, with its intense stressors, including isolation and exhaustion, its stimulation of aggression and its harsh discipline, will create or exacerbate long-term mental ill health. [Interruption.]
Those teenagers who have left the Army disappointed, disillusioned and perhaps deeply damaged are as much veterans as the older men who fought in the Falklands or in the second world war. Their plight is often invisible, but our responsibility towards them is no less for that. It is our responsibility not only to support them, in every way possible, but to ask how we can protect other vulnerable young people from becoming early veterans. In 2018, the Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee reported on armed forces visits to schools. It noted that recruitment is not just an event but a process, and it made recommendations about guidance, scrutiny and data.
At a time when war is in all our thoughts, and when military spending and prestige are increasing, we might do well to revisit that issue with a consciousness of how positive campaigns—such as support for girls in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education—can be used as a wedge to normalise the presence and influence of the military.
I commend the work of those who raise awareness of issues about the armed forces, especially in relation to young people, including the provision of information about their obligations and rights. As other members have done this afternoon, I put on record my thanks to those organisations and employers who seek to support veterans—of whatever age—and their families not only into employment, but with all the other aspects of civilian life that are fraught with difficulties and challenges for people who have experienced horrors that most of us are grateful not to have endured.
In conclusion, members of this Parliament and the people whom we represent will hold a wide range of views about war, the armed forces and the role of the military in Scotland’s future, but we can share a recognition that people who have joined and left the armed forces, after a long or short period, deserve our most serious care and attention.
I gently remind members to make sure that their mobile devices are in silent mode. We move to the closing speeches of the debate.
16:31
This afternoon’s debate has been fascinating, interesting and very respectful. A number of members have pointed out that members across the chamber extend our thanks to our armed services, past and present, for what they do. We have had not only a fascinating insight into the often less seen work of the armed forces, but examples of veterans, third sector organisations and companies that are guiding the transition out of the armed forces and into civilian life.
Scottish Labour is very clear that we require statutory targets to underpin the delivery of the armed forces covenant, which many members have spoken about this afternoon. It should be the very base of expectation for those who serve in our armed forces, be that for half a day or for many decades, when they are welcomed back into communities.
Scottish Labour recognises the particular challenges that armed forces children and young people face and that their opinion should be listened to and taken seriously in all matters that affect them. I will return to that later in my speech.
Before I do so, I will highlight the opening contribution from my colleague Paul Sweeney, and, in particular, his reference to the event that happened this week with Glasgow’s Helping Heroes, which was also mentioned by my colleague Carol Mochan. Along with fascinating and incredibly insightful videos and a very worthwhile report, “Enabling our Armed Forces community to thrive”, the phrase that caught my attention at the event was that those who were brave enough to join up need to be brave enough to push open the door to a supportive, holistic group of people who understand the challenges that they have faced—a single, one-stop shop for all the support that they need in Glasgow. I extend my thanks to all those who were involved in that event, including the Forces in Mind Trust, which funded it.
A number of contributions mentioned the very great variety of veterans that we now have in our communities, from young people who left because life in the armed forces was not what they expected—Maggie Chapman pointed out the challenges that they face—all the way through to, as Jamie Greene emphasised, the more classic view of a veteran that people have in their minds. They all deserve the support of this Parliament and the rest of Scotland for what they have done.
People who suffer both physical and mental trauma as a result of their time in service—there are 2,000 of those individuals in Scotland—face very particular challenges, an aspect that was recognised by a lot of speakers, especially Graeme Dey. It is always worth listening to someone with his expertise and knowledge of the subject, about which he speaks passionately.
I thank the member for his kind words. On the subject of veterans who have been left damaged in some way and who suffered through their time in service, will he join me in recognising the cohort of gay and transgender people who are now represented by Fighting with Pride—which the cabinet secretary is well versed on—but who could have been jailed merely for being homosexual in the Army, as it was portrayed at the time? The last such person was jailed in 1995. Will he join me in recognising that cohort and our responsibility to now put right what they suffered, as far as we can?
Absolutely, and I am very grateful for that intervention. Our armed forces reflect our wider society exactly as our wider society is, and the support that we extend to any minority group in society should also be extended to the equivalent minority group in our armed forces.
This did not happen in Scotland, but I know that a significant number of veterans will be aware of the death of Peter Brown, the veteran flight sergeant from the Windrush generation, who recently died on his own. The call has gone out to find family members and those who recall him, and those who wish to support him, to attend his funeral. That speaks to a position in which we would never want to find ourselves, but it also speaks to the reality of what some veterans are facing today.
I will speak about Christine Grahame’s contribution, because I found it incredibly powerful. The simple statement that one size does not fit all our veterans is so important in any aspect of interaction, as was the point about the lack of proper data, which we need. Christine Grahame, Jamie Greene and others spoke powerfully about the spouses and partners of our veterans, and about our young people. We are still incredibly short of data on our armed forces children.
Many of our veterans’ families cannot be compensated and looked after by schemes that are set up by Governments because they are not veterans themselves. Will the member take a moment to congratulate the associations in regiments and units that take pride in raising money for families to assist them where the Government cannot?
Mr Whitfield, I can give you the time back.
I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. There is no challenge whatsoever in my extending thanks and gratitude to all such organisations and groups. I think that that speaks very much to what we have heard today about the comradeship that is sometimes lost when people leave the armed forces. That comradeship is such a strong part of our armed forces.
I take the opportunity to mention Forces Children Scotland, which is an incredibly important organisation that supports veteran families. It supports the transitions between schools that we have heard about, when our young people have to explain to their friends in school what being an armed forces child is like. They talk about their fear of and concerns about moving and having to make new circles of friends, but there are also those who stay in one place, with one parent being away on service.
There is the Forces Life board game and comic book, which armed forces children created to explain to their friends what their experiences of being a forces child are like. For decades, the group has worked to advocate for and support children and young people, and it has tried to persuade our local authorities to have forces champions to reach out to them.
The children and young people in forces and veteran families have experiences that are unique—the anxiety about the parent who is away on active duty, the difficulty of relocating regularly, and the challenge that that brings in education and the social support that those families need. Some are young carers who have responsibilities for younger siblings that they feel have been placed on their shoulders, which can impact on their future opportunities and employability.
The debate has been very positive and I am glad to have taken part. It is a debate that we should have regularly to keep an eye on the Scottish Government’s commitments, both the statutory ones and those that they rightly take on on behalf of the people of Scotland. It is also an opportunity for people in our armed forces, veterans and, in the case that I make, their families and children to know that we are thinking of them, that they are important and that they will remain central to the decisions that we make here.
16:39
I am delighted to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives and to speak in support of the amendment in the name of Edward Mountain.
I welcome the fact that time has been set aside to debate how best we can support veterans as they transition into civilian life. It is right that we also acknowledge the important role that veterans’ families can and do play throughout that process, and that we discuss how we can best support them to do so.
We owe our veterans a debt of sincere gratitude for their service to our country. Many of us, from all parties, have acknowledged that debt today. As well as our gratitude, we owe veterans a commitment to do all that we can to support them to contribute to society. That is vital.
Veterans are often spoken about as one group, but the truth is that veterans come from various backgrounds, with different skill sets, talents and needs. However, the common feature among veterans is that they all have something to offer society after leaving the armed forces.
Around 1,800 of those who leave the armed forces each year come to live in Scotland. It is estimated that, by 2028, nearly half of veterans will be of working age. It is therefore important that we acknowledge how much they have done and that we help them to transfer their skills to civilian life effectively.
As the Scottish veterans commissioner has set out, the aim for veterans when transitioning is to find the correct job rather than just any job. It is a common trend among individuals leaving the services that they sell themselves short when trying to find employment. It is vital that we ensure that they do not sell themselves short.
The support and advice that are offered to service leavers is also vital. The Careers Transition Partnership and Skills Development Scotland play their part, but we also need to play ours.
As it stands, and as the veterans commissioner has acknowledged, a number of veterans and their families are unaware of the services that are available to them. She says that the available support needs to be flagged up so that those leaving the armed forces can consider all the services that they are entitled to and all the potential careers that they might wish to pursue.
Career pathways include self-employment. Many veterans do not consider that pathway, but there are lots of opportunities in it. As we have heard, there are businesses—big and small—that are happy to support veterans. That support could act as a stepping stone for veterans to set up their own businesses. It is vital that we support all those possibilities to ensure that they get additional help—including, sometimes, added financial support—so that that career pathway can become a reality.
It is also important that access to social security is discussed when we consider how systems work for veterans. We know that the Scottish Government’s benefit take-up strategy rightly aims at addressing some of the concerns in that area, but it also acknowledges that veterans as a group are less likely to access all the benefits that they are entitled to. The strategy fails to tailor its approach to veterans, and that has been acknowledged. I hope that the cabinet secretary will speak about that issue during his summing up.
It is clear that Scotland has a real role to play in that regard, and it is good to see that the UK Government has been working with the Scottish Government to manage some of those matters. The reviews that have come out show the very important work that has taken place.
I would like to mention some of the contributions that we have heard this afternoon. The cabinet secretary talked about maximising opportunities. It is vital that we maximise the opportunities for each and every service leaver and that nobody is forgotten about. As the cabinet secretary said, the Scottish Government has a “No one left behind” approach.
General practitioner services and childcare have been mentioned. Those are all part of the jigsaw as we try to ensure that veterans have the support that they need.
My colleague Edward Mountain talked about the support that individuals from the armed forces have and the joint strategy that is in place. However, there are issues when it comes to education, childcare, GPs, housing and homelessness. I echo the sentiment that the armed forces covenant should be enshrined. Those are important issues to take on board.
I was at the event in Parliament that Paul Sweeney hosted on Tuesday, and I acknowledge the fantastic support that Glasgow’s Helping Heroes is providing in the Glasgow area. The event was an eye-opener that showed us parliamentarians what is happening on the ground and what we can do to support that.
In his speech today, Paul Sweeney talked about the good practice that takes place to support veterans. He said that individuals from the veterans community can be “worth their weight in gold” to employers, and it is vital that we get that message across. They are not individuals who are sitting back, not doing things, or sitting on the street, or having issues. They only need opportunities to work for something and achieve it.
My colleague Russell Findlay spoke about the employment issues for veterans who have physical and mental issues to manage. Some come home with trauma, but many do not come home with any of the traumas that have been discussed this afternoon. It is very important to make progress on how we manage benefits, the isolation and the physical and mental healthcare needs of all of them.
Jamie Greene spoke about what is required when it comes to healthcare, which is a vitally important issue. He also spoke about issues that I, too, heard about when I went to Lossiemouth, when families mentioned how hard it is to find employment and to follow up on a job as they had childcare issues and there was not enough support around to allow them to make that transition.
It is important that we try to marry those things together. I know that the cabinet secretary has spoken about that, but I have been to two or three events, during this session of Parliament and the previous one, when I have visited families who have talked about that issue. They continue to talk about it, so there is still a gap there that needs to be looked at.
Homelessness and suicide are also massive issues when it comes to how we manage and support our veterans.
Throughout the debate, we have talked about the importance of veterans within our society, about the unique skill set that many of those individuals have to offer and about their great potential in helping us to have a flourishing labour market.
We have also heard about some of the specific challenges that our veterans still face when transitioning into civilian life. Martin Whitfield spoke about the Forces Life board game and comic book. I have had the privilege of being involved in that process from its inception, when youngsters came and spoke about it. We then went to a university art class, which decided to do the designs. I hope that, later this year, we will have the opportunity to launch the board game and comic book. It did not happen as planned due to a delay by us, in Parliament, one night, resulting in the youngsters not being able to come, but I am sure that it will take place in the future.
Without question, there is a lot of consensus around what is taking place. We all want to support as many individuals as we can through the transition into civilian life, so that veterans can enjoy the productive life that they deserve, given the contributions and the sacrifices that they have made. We owe it to them to ensure that they get the best start, which we all enjoy, when they leave service and join society.
I call Keith Brown to wind up the debate. Cabinet secretary, I would be grateful if you could take us up to just before decision time.
16:47
I agree with the last point that was made: it has been a very good debate. There has been a substantial degree of consensus, although that was not actually my intention in agreeing to hold the debate. I did so not because anybody asked me to, but because, as members may remember, I said in our last veterans debate that it would be good to have another opportunity, outwith remembrance, when people feel constrained in making any criticism or challenge that they might want to make. That is the purpose behind holding this debate. Perhaps, in the future, we will get even more challenge.
I also hope that all parties in the chamber will have more members in attendance when we discuss the future of veterans. Perhaps we can attract more people to the public gallery if we make sure that such debates are worthy of their attendance, too. I think that the subject of the future of our veterans merits more interest.
The debate has been generally consensual, but I am afraid that I will reluctantly have to break that consensus to the extent that I cannot accept the Labour amendment, because of its implications. I have visited Glasgow’s Helping Heroes a number of times. It is a fantastic organisation and there are many other fantastic organisations across the country. However, the work that is done by those and other organisations is done through local authorities, the third sector or voluntary or charitable bodies. It is not practicable that the Scottish Government could insist on taking, from across the country, every example of good practice to put them in a framework—indeed, a statutory framework was suggested. I have a great deal of sympathy with the aims behind the amendment and, from the many times that I have visited the project, everything that I could say about the Glasgow’s Helping Heroes would be positive. However, there are many other projects across the country that we rely on in this work—about 400 charities in Scotland are concerned with veterans—and we rely on local authorities and others, too.
To try to soften that blow, if it is a blow, I welcome some of the speeches that we heard from Labour members. In particular, Carol Mochan raised the issue of social inequality, which is very rarely raised in these debates.
Recruiting grounds, especially for infantry and the Army, have often been in areas of multiple deprivation—I joined the armed forces from such an area. At the very start of the 13 years during which—at various points—I have been doing this job, senior people in the MOD and the armed forces were happy to say, “That’s how we found these people and that’s how we’ll leave them; we have no responsibility to help them in the future.” I think that that attitude has changed and that there is now an acknowledgement that an obligation exists—that if we take people at that age in life, who are then trained in the way in which they are and who do the things that they do and make the sacrifices to which Alexander Stewart referred, society has a responsibility.
The armed forces provide educational and other opportunities—
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
Yes.
I thank the cabinet secretary for his words on that important point, which is close to my heart, about inequalities in society.
With regard to the Labour amendment, would the cabinet secretary consider some sort of statement of intent? We are not asking him to do those things specifically; we are just asking for some kind of national standards to which the organisations out there could work.
There has been some confusion. I have heard from Labour members—in fact, I think, from Carol Mochan herself—that we need to have a statutory framework and statutory standards. I am a bit unclear about what is proposed. Does Labour think that the Scottish Parliament should agree those standards, or will they be imposed or brought in by a future UK Government? I know that the Conservatives have said—
Paul Sweeney rose—
I will just finish this point.
The Conservatives want to introduce a bill, which I will be happy to consider; I am happy to look at any proposals that the Labour Party has in relation to the matter as well. However, it is not yet clear to me exactly what is intended. How does Labour intend to go beyond the covenant provisions, which are enshrined in law only in as much as statutory services have to take into account the interests of veterans?
We can perhaps find out what is proposed from Paul Sweeney.
It is disappointing that the Government is minded not to support Labour’s amendment. I can perhaps reassure the cabinet secretary that we do not propose putting a universal, statutory straitjacket on Government and to dictate how local services should be designed. Instead, it is about advertising or creating national exemplars that can offer inspiration to local authorities when they are designing services that are appropriate to their area. He might perhaps consider supporting the amendment in that spirit, even at this late stage.
Unfortunately, I have to consider the amendments that are in front of me. To respond to the point that Paul Sweeney and Carol Mochan have made, we try to do those things through the veterans fund—we try to ensure that we contribute to areas of good practice. I am willing to continue the discussion about how we can go forward.
The Labour amendment is well intentioned, but its practical implications are perhaps not the ones that were sought when it was drawn up. For that reason, I cannot support it.
As I said, however, I can support the Conservative amendment. I have a couple of points to make about the discussion that we have had about the relationship between the UK Government and the Scottish Government on support for veterans. Just to give more flesh to this, I exempt Annabel Goldie, who has always been keen to work collegiately, from anything that I am about to say. To exemplify the point that I am about to make, the last time that I went to meet her in London, the door of the MOD was essentially shut in my face—the staff had no knowledge of the meeting and would not even recognise my ID card. That is the attitude that I have also had from the secretary of state, who, unlike previous secretaries of state, has continuously refused to meet me. We have had one meeting of the ministerial veterans group in the past two years.
I was assured that I would get a response in relation to the Scottish Government’s recent innovation in paying for replacement medals for veterans who have legitimately lost them or had them stolen, but I have had none. I take at face value the suggestion offered by Jamie Greene and other Conservative members that the attitude could change for the reason stated by many Conservative members, which is that if we work together on these things, we can achieve more. However, that has not been my experience.
Another example is London interbank offered rate—LIBOR—funding. Much has been said about some of the UK Government’s good initiatives, but it withdrew LIBOR funding overnight. With no dedicated resources coming to it from the UK Government for veterans funding, the Scottish Government has had to find funding to backfill—for example, Age Scotland was previously funded by the LIBOR funding.
That said, there is scope for more work to be done and there is more that we can achieve together.
I am very appreciative of the remarks that Maggie Chapman made and for the relationship that we have had while working on these and other justice issues. She has been productive and respectful—until today, when she referred to the old men who served in the Falklands war. That is it—the relationship between us is over. [Laughter.]
Some very good contributions have been made. In time, I would hope that whoever in the Government is responsible for these matters can build on today’s debate, which, if I am honest, has been a bit tentative. People have tried to be consensual, which is good; however, challenges need to be made, both to the Government and to others. The more we can do that, the more we can improve the service that we provide to veterans.
I will respond to Christine Grahame’s point about the spouses and families of serving personnel. We both made the point that they are crucial to the morale of serving personnel. She asked about what we do for those families when transition happens. The point that I was trying to make in my opening speech was that we should be supporting them long before a transition happens. If we can make sure that spouses of serving personnel—whether they are nurses, teachers or doctors—are properly employed during the time that their spouse or partner is in service, that transition will become much easier. We have to tackle those challenges at the earliest possible stage.
Could the cabinet secretary comment on the paucity of data on the children of armed forces personnel, as well as on the question that was contained in the census?
I was very interested in the point that was made. My constituency is the only one in Scotland that has a school that is dedicated to the children of armed forces personnel, which is the Queen Victoria School in Dunblane, so I am very close to the issue.
Paul Sweeney also asked a question about the census data, which we will have in 2024. In the meantime, we have worked with the UK Government on a survey that asks more general questions, some of which relate to children, about people’s experiences in the armed forces. We are still to work through the treasure trove of information that that will provide.
I am well aware that, during the time that I have been doing this job, one unit was moved from Germany to Edinburgh to Northern Ireland within 18 months. The children of those families had to move with them and went into three different education systems, which is not good for anyone. Maggie Chapman made a point about the way that we treat people in the armed forces, especially if they have families.
There have been a great many valuable contributions in the debate. I hope that this will be the first of many debates about how veterans can be best assured of our support. In this case, we are talking about employability, but the same would be true if we were talking about homelessness and veterans health.
I am not making a point against anyone, but there has been a temptation for many years to try to portray veterans as being “mad, bad and sad”—a horrendous phrase. That portrayal is so far removed from the reality: the vast majority of veterans, manage to come back into society and are productive. Members from all sides of the chamber have said how much veterans can offer employers and society. Veterans are not overrepresented among the homeless, those who have mental health issues or the prison population, although there are some interesting and challenging aspects to the veteran prisoner population in Scotland. The Forces in Mind Trust, which has been mentioned, will look at that, especially in relation to sexual offending. However, the vast majority of veterans come back into society and play a productive role.
Collectively, our challenge is to make sure that that role is commensurate with what veterans have done. As I have said, if someone who leaves the armed forces as a colour sergeant, having spent 20 or 30 years in the armed forces and having accumulated all that experience and training, is asked to feel grateful because they get a job that is way below their level of experience, that is not doing right by veterans. We have to do better by them. I am keen to continue working with the UK Government and I am grateful for Jamie Greene’s offer to see what we can do to improve relations.
We have published our refreshed veterans strategy action plan, in which we made several commitments under the theme of employment, education and skills. As I have said, we will follow that through, but it is right that we are challenged. In future, I would hope that whoever is responsible for this area in the Government continues in that way. Let us have more debates and more people from all parties participating in them. Not enough people were in the chamber to hear some of the very good speeches that were made.
Air ais
Portfolio Question TimeAir adhart
Decision Time