 Llywodraeth yw'r 71,000 yng Nghymru sydd wedi'i gweithio'r GTCS-202. Thank you. That ends topical questions. The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on developing Scotland's young workforce. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement and there should therefore be no interventions or interruptions, and I'll just give a few moments for the front benches to get themselves settled. Angela Constance, Cabinet Secretary, 10 minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm grateful for the opportunity to set out the Government's initial response to the final report of the Commission for Developing Scotland's young workforce, which Serene Wood presented to me earlier this month. It is a report that I fully welcome and whose ambitions for young people employment and prosperity in Scotland I share without exception. I know that we all support the positive vision for Scotland's young people evident throughout the report, and I want to put in record my thanks to Serene, the Commission and all who contributed to their work for presenting such insightful, pragmatic and clear recommendations. When we asked Serene to lead this work some 18 months ago, this Government was anticipating the need to address youth unemployment in the context of a more positive economic outlook. We presented the commission with an extremely challenging remit. We asked it to explore how we might develop a modern, responsive and valued vocational training system and emulate the labour markets of the best-performing European countries. Recognising the need to make the most effective use of the skills of all our young women and men, I asked the commission to consider in particular how all young people can benefit from education and employment, regardless of gender, ethnicity or disability. I was delighted to receive the report and its 39 recommendations. They represent a coherent, practical and powerful set of ideas about what more needs to be done to align our education system firmly and for the long term with the needs of the economy. The report's treatise for further change and improvement is inarguable, in my view, and that is why today we are embarking on a campaign to develop Scotland gym workforce taking the report's recommendations as a starting point. Our ambitions for economic growth will not be realised without higher levels of employment amongst young people, recognising the scale of our ambitions and the radical reduction required if we are to reduce youth unemployment amongst the lowest in Europe. The Scottish Government's goal is to reduce youth unemployment in Scotland by 40 per cent by 2020. Today I will set out what this Government will do to take immediate action on all the young workforce and work towards this goal and I will return to the role of our partners later. As Serene himself said, developing the young workforce demands a culture change from all parts of the education and training system and from employers, young people and those who influence young people over the medium term. We have world-class higher education in Scotland and Scotland's young people deserve a vocational education offer of the same quality and value. The report recognises that this Government's education, training and employment policies and programmes, including curriculum for excellence, college reform and employer support measures, have established the right platform to create a world-class vocational education system in Scotland, valued by and valuable to our young people. As the commission's report says, the introduction of curriculum for excellence in primary schools and in S1 to S3 is already making a difference as a new approach to teaching and learning is helping pupils to develop many of the skills and attributes that they will need to be successful in their working lives. Of course, there is more that we can and will do now to act on the report. A key feature of a world-leading vocational education system is one that is shaped by employers and meets the needs of industry. I can announce today that I will make an initial £1 million available for the establishment of industry-led investing young people groups, which will make the crucial links between employers and education that will in turn improve opportunities for young people. We will work with local authorities and other partners to develop those groups. Key to the successful implementation will be a strong and committed employer leadership. To achieve that, we will look to work with a number of established groups such as those highlighted by the commission in Glasgow, Renfrewshire and Edinburgh. Do those parts of the country where such groups do not already exist, we will work with local employers to support the establishment of new groups in partnership with existing organisations and service providers. I am in full agreement with the report that employers should be publicly recognised for the contribution that they make to developing Scotland's young workforce. The Government is working with investors and people to develop an invest in young people award, and I expect that to be in place soon. I want to turn to how we will further develop training opportunities for Scotland's young women and men. Our modern apprenticeship programme stands out as an exemplar of an employment-based vocational training offer. I want to see it expand, flex and focus to help us to achieve more for our economy and for all of our young men and women. The Government has already committed to creating more ME opportunities by expanding the programme to 30,000 starts each year by 2020. Today, I can announce further improvements to the modern apprenticeship programme, building on the recommendations from the commission's report. I can announce that, as we work with Skills Development Scotland to implement our expansion plans, we will deliver the recommendations that the report makes around modern apprenticeships. That will include offering more higher-level MEs and developing pilots for advanced apprenticeships, including to graduate level, encouraging more MEs in the critical STEM subject areas. I will also look to SDS to begin pilots for foundation apprenticeships. Those will see SDS work closely with schools and colleges to develop more structured pathways from the senior phase of schools, where young people will be able to combine their general education with elements of work-based learning. Those will provide a more practical grounding, which will help to prepare young people for future apprenticeships employment or further study. I am pleased to announce today that the first pilot of a foundation apprenticeship will begin in partnership with Fife College in August this year for school pupils studying engineering. This is an exciting development and one that will see that the principles of the report made real for a number of young people in the coming months. The campaign to develop Scotland's young workforce is also a hearts and minds campaign to transform the view of what vocational education offers in terms of engaging learning and desirable employment prospects. Young people and those who guide them should have access to high quality and current advice about the labour market and routes into that. Better careers guidance tools will be developed to inform young people and their parents about the future labour market opportunities and the skills that they need in line with the report's recommendations. So, SDS, working with Education Scotland, local authorities, the unions and, importantly, employers will develop services designed to inspire and challenge young people's career aspirations informed by labour market intelligence. The final area that I wish to address is that of equality. I was keen that the commission's work should explore in depth the issues around access to vocational opportunities. I believe that the report delivers this with an ambitious set of recommendations, which have been widely welcomed by a number of equality groups. Everyone in this chamber should acknowledge the disappointing figures on equality contained in the commission's report. Despite making significant progress on increasing the proportion of women benefiting from the MA programme from 27 per cent to 41 per cent, it is clear that tackling occupational segregation must remain a vital priority. The report recognises the difficulty in changing the perceptions and culture that can drive the behaviours of young people and employers, and to make progress we must develop coherent approaches that look at all stages of the pathways to work. Across those approaches, I have asked to see a renewed focus on the needs of different young people, particularly those that face the greatest disadvantage and barriers to good training and work. We will work quickly with Skills Development Scotland and those expert groups to develop action plans that build on the good work that is already happening. I can confirm today that I expect Skills Development Scotland to lead work to improve opportunities for those groups currently underrepresented in the MA programme. That will include encouraging young women and men to consider career options in non-traditional sectors and supporting careers, coaches, parents, carers and teachers to help to challenge and break down gender and cultural stereotypes. It is important that Skills Development Scotland develops specific plans to address the gender balance on certain frameworks and to help to increase participation by minority ethnic young people, young people with disability and also care leavers. Those action plans will help to ensure that all young people can secure real and lasting equality of opportunity. In very large part, achieving our ambitions for young people is about focusing our existing resources in the most effective way. However, to help to kick-start this important activity, I am allocating an additional £3 million to Skills Development Scotland to take this work on modern apprenticeships, careers and equality forward with immediate effect. Education Scotland will also receive an additional £0.5 million to support action when developing the young workforce. From the basis of those early actions, the Government will lead a concerted effort jointly with the local government to develop Scotland's young workforce. As ever, early intervention is crucial, and that means action that is very often focused on young people who are still in the school system. For this reason, the development of Scotland's young workforce will be a joint endeavour between us and partners in the local government. There are many partners involved in acting on the report's recommendations in particular local government, and the Government will work in partnership with COSLA over the coming weeks to plan for implementation. Together, we will develop detailed plans over the summer, which we will publish in the autumn of 2015-16, as our 2015-16 budget plans are set out. Maybe I will just recapsulate that again, Presiding Officer, so that we are clear for chamber. The Scottish Government, together with our partners, will develop very detailed plans over the summer, which we will publish in the autumn as we move forward with our plans to develop our 2015-16 budget plans. We have already made clear that the resource implications of that effort will be taken into consideration in the development of our budget, and I very much look forward to sharing those developments with Parliament over the coming months. The cabinet secretary wishes to ask a question of the cabinet secretary, she would press the request but now. I call Jenny Marra, who will be followed by Mary Scanlon. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We welcome the cabinet secretary's statement on the important wood commission report today. We also welcome her announcement that she will be making detailed plans over the summer, and I look forward to debating them with her after recess. I have met Sir Ian Wood, Presiding Officer, since the publication of the report, and I want to also put on record our thanks in the Labour Party, our thanks to him and the members of his commission for their work and commitment to youth employment, one of the most critical problems in our communities today. There is much in this report that we welcome, the renewed focus and rehabilitation of vocational training, no longer to be seen in Scotland as the Cinderella option, but taking its rightful place, a skilled, valued and a respected and prosperous option for young people planning their work and their careers. Building towards that, I particularly like Sir Ian's recommendations for more work experience for school pupils and more intense relationships between schools and colleges. By the Scottish Government's own figures, it says that youth employment has fallen by 25 per cent since the cabinet secretary was appointed. That leads me to ask her why we have such a modest reduction target of 40 per cent by 2020 if she would expect a 25 per cent increase anyway. Why then just supplement that by 15 per cent? It seems to me to be quite modest, and we should be looking to eradicate youth employment. The final point is our colleges. Those recommendations are underpinned by the success of our colleges. We have had many debates in here as to the underfunding of our colleges. The cabinet secretary pledged £12 million on the publication of this report. I only see £4 million allocated today, so can she tell me if the rest of that money will be spent in our colleges? I thank Ms Marra for her supportive comments, and particularly with respect to her comments about the value and importance of vocational training. It is imperative for the future of our young people, but also for the future of our economy that, in tandem with our world-class higher education system, we have a world-class vocational training system. The reason for that is what we have learned from other European countries. The European countries with the lowest levels of youth unemployment—those countries that have either maintained or reduced youth unemployment despite a global economic recession—are all countries with very well-established vocational training systems that are highly valued with employers and where employers have a very active role in. In terms of the target of 40 per cent, my understanding of the commission's work is that it has, like me, looked at the best-performing European countries. At present, Scotland has the ninth-lowest youth unemployment rate in Europe. I would concede that youth unemployment remains far too high, and that is a point that we can all unite on. The 40 per cent is illustrative of what we would need to do if Scotland was to become among the top three or five best-performing European economies. Let me reassure Ms Marra that we are not dampened by our ambition one little bit. I think that we can unite the fact that we want to eradicate youth unemployment. We might have a difference of opinion as to how best to do that. I would rather see this Parliament with a fuller range of job-creating powers. That is one aspect, but I think that in terms of the hearing now in the report, I very much hope that we can work together as we develop those implementation plans. Ms Marra is right that there are £12 million allocated to Kickstart, our work to progress the Wood commission. I have allocated £4.5 million of that today, and what I now want to do in the work that I have started is to work with our partners in local government and also colleges and the funding council to discuss how we might utilise the rest of those funds. That is very important discussions that have commenced and that will continue in the next few weeks. Of course, we will report back to Parliament. Mary Scanlon, Saul Byrlland of Fabiani. In one minute, I have got. Can I welcome the statement? Can I welcome the proposals? Can I put on record a Conservative support for Sir Ian Wood and his commission? My questions are, can I first of all ask in terms of the careers guidance tool, which is to help parents understand better the merits of vocational education? It would be helpful to get an update on that. Also, how can we track the progress of those who engage in vocational education, which was recommended by the commission, the new senior face benchmarking tool? My third point is on, I also very much welcome additional levels four and fives, but as the minister rightly states, only 10 females did level five this past year and 114 male. It is just to ask how that will be addressed, and, like Jenny Marra, will the colleges get their fair share? I am grateful to Mary Scanlon for her support. I know that she has tracked the work of the Wood commission from the very early days and has attended and participated in a number of events with stakeholders, and that is certainly appreciated. On the work that I have announced today and the funding that I have announced today, essentially that is around implementing the recommendations in the report with regards to earlier careers advice, information and guidance. We, of course, have to do that in full partnership with local government. Anything in and around schools requires very close partnership working. I am keen that, from the perspective of Skills Development Scotland, that, as we engage with our partners, Government agencies such as Skills Development Scotland are funded and ready to act to proceed with the recommendations about earlier career guidance, because that is certainly something that chimes with me. We have to get young people the right information prior to them making subject choices. On the equalities agenda, we really need to start to be engaging with young children while they are at primary school. Many people would argue that the work that my colleague Eileen Campbell does in the early years is that there is work around there that we need to be doing even earlier to break down those crucial barriers. In essence, SDS will be primed to engage on earlier careers advice and they are developing national resources, tools that can be used in primary schools and, crucially, can be used with parents. I attended Fort Valley College yesterday and heard about the great work that they do, not just engaging and advising young people in that area of vocational opportunities, but also selling a message to parents as well, as they like. I feel that parents are crucial in that agenda. We are young people, first and foremost, people who support young people, teachers and those in colleges, employers. We cannot do it without them, but we also need to be ensuring that the right information is getting to parents. There will be some work done around that and occupational outlook. Essentially, that will be taking labour market information from skills investment plans, and I suppose translating it into simple digestible language so that we can get information quickly and easily to those who are helping young people with their choices and helping young people to inform their opinion. We have had many debates about how to improve the quality and participation of various young people. The crucial thing about our modern apprenticeship programme is that it works. We know that it leads to sustainable employment, so there is an increased onus on us all to ensure that more young people, irrespective of gender, ethnicity, disability and those young people from care backgrounds, can get access to that opportunity. There is a wide range of recommendations that take a life-stage approach that is thinking about what is happening in schools, in SDS, in colleges and making us all accountable for that, and we will, of course, have to report back in due course. If we could have shorter answers, it would be extremely helpful. That goes for the questions to Ms Fabiani, followed by Liam McArthur. I am particularly pleased to see the plans in the report for schools and colleges to join with employers and sustain fruitful partnerships, and that will be to mutual benefit. Cabinet Secretary, there are already employers in East Kilbride interested in those ideas, and that must be the same in many other places. I wonder whether there has been any consideration given to some fast-track pilot projects for companies that are already concerned about skills shortages and want to very much encourage local people into employment. I think that that would be an excellent way to spearhead that very exciting initiative, and it would reiterate that consideration has been given to that. Yes, employers are absolutely crucial to the agenda, and that hearts and minds campaign about persuading young people and their parents about how their career prospects will be enhanced by pursuing vocational training is imperative. We also know that we have a hearts and minds campaign to engage with employers, and many employers realise the value of young people in their workforce and the economic case for investing in young people. Given the nature of some of the employers in Ms Fabiani's constituency, she might be interested to know that some of the early progress that we are making, in particular with advanced apprenticeships—the pilots for advanced apprenticeships, that is career-level apprenticeships—are likely to have an engineering focus, and that might be of interest to some of the employers in Ms Fabiani's area. There is a lot of interest among employers on the length and breadth of Scotland in advanced apprenticeships, and I suppose that my attitude would be the more interest, the better, so that anything that she can do would encourage it with great respect. I thank the cabinet secretary and very much welcome the content of her statement. I also put on record my gratitude and that of the Scottish-level Democrats to Sir Ian Wood and his colleagues. Not just, as Jenny Marra said, for his accessibility to MSPs throughout the process, but for the positive vision that he has set out and the very clear and comprehensive recommendations that he has put forward. One of those is clearly around closer collaboration between colleges and schools. That makes sense. It should be the objective, but it is not new. It has been tried in the past and is thwarted, to some extent, not least by issues around funding and problems around double funding. Is there anything that the cabinet secretary can share with us at this stage that would give us confidence that some of those problems that have perhaps inhibited that closer collaboration can be overcome going forward? I think that Mr MacArthur's right to intimate that there are already existing examples of good partnership working between schools and colleges. I know in West Lothian my own area that there is a shared timetable for pupils in the senior phase. I think that what is different this time—I take the point that some of this has been tried before—is that I do not think that the level of ambition has been seen before, either in terms of the scale or the purpose. He is right about the issues in the past about double funding. However, as we move forward, we are building on existing assets. The one thing that is different now, as opposed to in the past, is schools in terms of curriculum for excellence. It was encouraging to see that Serene Wood recognised the existing assets. Both in terms of our colleges—he described them as re-energised, fallen reorganisation—and he had a deep praise for curriculum for excellence. I suppose that there are two things now that will set us up for good progress and good success with what I would describe as renewed partnership working between schools, colleges and businesses. Both schools and colleges now all must do is be much more outward facing and engaging with industry. Roderick Campbell, fall by Kezia Dugdale. The recent Children and Young People Act has put in place significant steps to change the outcome of people leaving care. However, as Serene Wood states, care leavers experience some of the poorest educational and employment outcomes of any group of young people, whilst I welcome the recommendations on people leaving care. However, can the minister advise on any further detail on how they will be taken further? Thank you, Mr Campbell. I am not precious about titles. Mr Campbell does not have to worry about that. However, I can assure him that it is my absolute commitment to care leavers and the commitment that exists in this Government and across the chamber to improving the career prospects and the life prospects of care leavers as a former social worker. I know that I talk about that a lot, but it is something of my former career that has left an on-going mark. There are a number of recommendations on care leavers. We are discussing them with our partners. I am very open to those suggestions. Particularly, anything that recognises and tries to deal with the delayed progression that care leavers and the disrupted progression that they can have in their education. I am very open to those suggestions for care leavers and other groups on where we can increase the age criteria for particular incentives and support. Labour have long argued that the SNP's obsession with hitting 25,000 modern apprenticeships came at the expense of the skill needs of the economy. Does the wood commission's renewed focus on level 3 MAs and above tied to growth industries prove that we were right? No, I do not think that it does, with respect to Mr Dugdale. I think that there are three very important things that this Government has always tried to do. I think that those things will be expanded upon as we progress with the implementation of the wood report. I should say that, in terms of our modern apprenticeship programme, I am very pleased that 62 per cent of our provision on the apprenticeship programme is at level 3 or above. That compares very favourably to what happens elsewhere south of the border. It is a very positive increase on the previous year. In terms of the three things that we are trying to do, bearing in mind that we all know that apprenticeships work, there is a great transition from young people from education into work. Yes, we want to expand the numbers, yes, we want to increase the focus on STEM and growth areas, but we also need to do so in a way that increases the representation of groups that are currently underrepresented. While we could very quickly increase the numbers, that may be at the expense of women. We do not want to do so at the expense of women. Those are the three planks of how we will move forward. We want to increase numbers, increase STEM and growth areas, and increase the representation of underrepresented groups. It is a very carefully planned progression, and we need to do that with care. As the report itself talks about, it talks about a carefully managed expansion. The Government is certainly accepting of the recommendations that are made around the apprenticeship programme in the report. Annabelle Ewing, followed by Ken Macintosh. I am pleased to note that the general reference in the statement to equality issues is very important, but could the cabinet secretary outline what concrete steps the Scottish Government will take to help to improve the gender balance in subjects that are traditionally dominated by one sex, such as STEM subjects, and, on the other hand, in areas such as childcare? I am glad that Ms Ewing has recognised that it is important to get more women in STEM subjects, but it is also important to get more young men pursuing careers in childcare, particularly since Ms Campbell has plans to expand the childcare workforce, because that will be much needed as we progress with our aspirations for universal childcare. I think that it is really important that, when you look at the report for the first time, Skills Development Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council will have to report on the progress made in response to very detailed action plans. We are very clear that we need to have a life-stage report starting in schools, but we need to have a range of actions and activities throughout the education system and the pathway to work. I am very struck by the current examples of some pre-employability, pre-apprentices programmes. They seem to me well-placed to target specific groups, but there is no silver bullet to all of that. Scotland is not alone. When I look around the best-performing European economies, some of them do very good things in terms of equalities and occupational segregation in particular areas, but there is no obvious world leader in tackling occupational segregation. I think that there is a space there for Scotland with its collective will and collective action for us to become a world leader in tackling things such as occupational segregation. I welcome the minister's statement under support for the work of the Wood commission. The minister will be aware that the number of young people between 18 and 24 who remain or who become economically inactive remains stubbornly high. The most recent figures show another increase to £129,000 this year. So far, the Government's measures seem to be difficult to halt the rise. Can I ask which of today's announcement does she expect to be of greatest benefit to those in the group who have withdrawn from the workforce altogether? The part of my ministerial statement that I did not reach was discussing how we progress with the recommendations contained in the wood report, but how, as part of that, we need to refresh the youth employment strategy. We know that the economy is now improving, but the big task for us is to ensure how our young people benefit from economic growth. That, in its essence, was part of our desire for commissioning the work undertaken by Wood. When you look at Scotland in good economic times, youth unemployment and those that were disengaged from the labour market remained too high. I talk about it a lot, but in 2006-07, youth unemployment in this country peaked at 14 per cent at a time of economic growth. What we now need to do is have a world-class vocational training system that establishes better pathways to work for all our young people when the economy is in good times and in bad. What steps is the cabinet secretary taking to ensure that the expansion of modern apprenticeships is properly aligned, as is recommended by Sir Ian Wood, with the skills required to support economic growth? How does she see the introduction and development of an industry quality and improvement regime contributing to the development and promotion of higher-level modern apprenticeships, which she mentioned, and the development of pilots for advanced apprenticeships? I hope that the cabinet secretary outlines some of that in my statement. As a Government, we are accepting of the recommendations from Wood around the modern apprenticeship programme. Education Scotland has an important role here in terms of the quality assurance of the off-the-job aspect of apprenticeships, and they are certainly involving more industry specialists. However, having that range of good quality apprenticeships from one end, having access to apprenticeships, enabling people who would not otherwise get access to getting that pathway to an apprenticeship is important. Having the foundation apprenticeships in schools is very important in terms of incentivising businesses to take on apprenticeships, because much of the work can be done in schools and our education system by preparing people for the employed status apprenticeship. In terms of the advanced apprenticeships, there is an important message that vocational education is challenging. It is not just for young people who do not do as well as they hoped in their hires. Vocational training and education is for young people of all abilities. It is for young people of a range of abilities. Margaret McAllough, followed by Gordon MacDonald. The commission commented on the need for additional funding if there is to be a longer-term growth in the modern apprenticeship programme, but right now there are sectors facing reduction in funding after a 10-year freeze in contribution rates. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern that the report does not deal enough with contribution rates as they are now, and that contribution rates should have to rise to sustain the quality of apprenticeships in the future? Will she include training providers in any discussions, as they are one of the major players in the delivery of the programme? I agree that training providers are major stakeholders. I am certainly more than happy to have discussions with training providers, but if Ms McAllough wants to have a particular discussion with me and involve training providers in that regard in the wood report, there is absolutely no problem about that. As she will know that the contribution rates are an operational matter for skills development Scotland, they have to align with things such as the cost of assessment and the cost of training and reflect the Government's economic strategy. Given that the publication of wood skills development Scotland will have to have another look at everything in the round. Can the cabinet secretary outline what recommendations the commission has made in order to encourage an increase in the current 29 per cent of employers who recruit young people directly from education? I think that there are many recommendations in the report that are focused on making a contribution towards increasing the overall proportion of the young workforce. In Scotland, just now, 29 per cent of employers recruit directly from education. I most certainly want to see that figure increase, and not the only part of that, but a crucial part to that is the investment in young people groups who will essentially act as local campaigners and champions. Those groups have to be employer-led, industry-led, and that is why today I announced £1 million to support local employer partnerships to help that work to get off the ground. I am absolutely committed to making life easier for employers so that they can offer good-quality opportunities to young people. I have noted that the member came in almost halfway through the statement, and I do not think that that is acceptable for any member. I remind members that they should be in here from the beginning of the statement, because I promise you that when we come back from the recess, we will enforce it rigidly. I apologise unreservedly for missing the beginning of the cabinet secretary's statement. I welcome the recognition of the importance of vocational training and the increased investment in it. Here in Scotland, as globally, rates of business ownership among women remain stubbornly low. Will this greater focus on vocational training, equality and improved careers guidance see more young women consider an entrepreneurial future? I most certainly hope so. I think that there would be strong evidence for that with things such as earlier careers information advice and guidance that has brought into life earlier in the world of work. The role of employers, including female employers, will do much to promote entrepreneurial activism and aspiration among our young people. It would be credible, although the report is not about women in business as such, but I think that there will be some direct and indirect spin-offs. I certainly hope that, when we come back from recess, I will have learnt to have been much more briefer. One can live in hope. That ends the statement from Angela Constance on developing Scotland's young workforce. The next site of business is a debate on motion number 1047, in the name of Keith Brown, on support for armed forces and veteran communities in Scotland. I will give a few seconds for the front benches to get themselves settled and organised. The 70th anniversary commemorations of the day-to-day landings on 6 June 1944 in Normandy, France, took place recently, with widespread recognition across generations young and old. I think that we have to ask the question why the marking of an event so long ago has such a draw, such an impact and generates so much interest and why is it in our national psyche? The 6 June 1944 changed the world. It led ultimately to the end of the Second World War and a much more peaceful Europe. I am very much looking forward next week to going to Contol Maison, where McRae's battalion, including players and supporters of Hearts Football Club and other football clubs in Scotland, many of whom perished on 1 July in the push on the Somme. We have seen an increase in peace since that Second World War. The sacrifice that was made that day in Normandy by so many, by the dead and those who survived, has always been recognised and acknowledged. It was and is those who defended our freedoms past, present and indeed future, who deserve our respect, our gratitude and our appreciation. Of course, commemorations were not confined to Normandy. I was honoured to join the Under Secretary of State for Scotland, the head of the Army in Scotland, politicians from across the political spectrum and veterans and their families at a reception in the great hall of Edinburgh Castle. That was a genuinely enjoyable and uplifting occasion and I met many remarkable people at that event. The Scottish Government is also playing its part in commemorating World War 1, which I have just mentioned, and a number of events in Scotland were recently announced by the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs. As members will know and I am sure welcome, Stirling will host Armed Forces Day this Saturday and this is the second time in five years that Scotland has played host. I believe that that is a deserved recognition of the steam in which Scotland holds our Armed Forces community. In terms of Scottish Government support, I can confirm that a grant of £80,000 has been made to the council in respect of Armed Forces Day. Secondly, the First Minister will join principal guests on the day. I, too, will be there and look forward to showing my support for our service personnel. It is, after all, one of my local Armed Forces Day events. I would strongly encourage members to join their local events or to come along to Stirling, and I am sure that they would be impressed if they do. In the weeks to come, the support of the Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force personnel in making the Commonwealth Games the success that they will undoubtedly be will also be a testament to their professionalism and skills. With that recognition, we should not forget about the Cadet Forces, Army, Sea, Marine, Air Training Corps and Combined Cadets. They are to be found all over Scotland and are a shiny example of young people at their best. I met two RAF cadets today and displayed many of those characteristics. Interestingly, the UK Government has recently announced funding for the Department of Education for the expansion of Cadet Forces. That is something that I would certainly wish to investigate further and support. I have met, as I have said, two cadets today. I made clear to them as well, because that is one of the questions that cadets have asked. That is certainly, in my view, an independent Scotland. The important role that is played by cadet forces would be maintained, and we would expect it to flourish. That is because we value what the cadets do and what people get from the cadet forces. Members will recall that, back in January, I announced that we would create a new Scottish Veterans Commissioner. There was broad support and consensus around the establishment of that post. I should recognise the opposition to some extent of the Liberal Democrats and the reservations that were expressed by Alex Ferguson at that point, although generally supportive of the idea of the commissioner's role. I very much welcomed that non-partisan approach in discussing ways in which to support our 400,000-plus veterans. A very thorough and detailed process has been followed to get the right appointment. The advertising process elicited considerable interest and a strong field of candidates. I believe that the commissioner will be in a pivotal position to improve the ways in which veterans access public, private and voluntary services. What ties all of the commissioner's work together, of course, is how effective it proves to be. That is why I will be asking for regular reports from the commissioner. We are very nearly at the end of that process and expect to make an announcement shortly. The reports that I have mentioned should lead to action, and the crucial point is that they should also lead to better services and support for our veterans. Often in our roles we learn of the problems faced by those coming out of the military or those who returned to civilian life some time ago. Before any examination of perceived problems, I would like to make clear that there are more than, as I have said, 400,000 veterans in Scotland, and the overwhelming majority of those, including the 2,000 or so who return to live in Scotland each year, do so without any real difficulty. They return to civilian life with skills, experience and a sense of civic responsibility that is entirely admirable. They are assets to their local communities and we are the richer for having them as neighbours. I discussed the need to convey positive messages about veterans to Lord Ashcroft, and he agreed. In fact, it is a centrepiece in the main theme of Lord Ashcroft's Veterans Transition Review, published back in February. I think that it is important to nail some myths and portray an accurate picture in relation to veterans. The Scottish prison population, for example, is not and has never been dominated by veterans. In the latest Scottish Prison Service, bulletin only 200, just under 2-3 per cent of the prison population, self-identified as veterans. That comes against an average total of over 8,000 prisoners held in custody in Scotland. Even if other recent surveys are taken into account, that number rises at all only to 600 at most, and that position is consistent with various studies in respect of the prison population in England and Wales. Crucially, those numbers are far fewer than some occasionally looted headlines would have us believe. Thank you. I am grateful to the minister for taking intervention. I absolutely agree with him that we can over egg this particular issue, but would he acknowledge the fact that, I think that I am right in saying that the number of veterans in prison last year in Scotland rose by 40 per cent is a figure that we need not to be complacent about? Minister Keith Brown? I take the point raised by Alex Ferguson. I refer back to the figures that I have just mentioned, but also to the fact that the veterans' first point are doing some important work in this year's now, which should give us some more detail, which I think will be welcome all round. I was going to say that not all veterans are homeless, and not all homeless people are veterans. Most veterans live in their own homes with parents, spouses and partners with children. I welcome approaches by councils, for example like Dumfries and Galloway, who award veterans extra points on the allocation scale, something that was made possible through legislation that we brought forward. In making use of its capacity building grant of £200,000 over three years in the Scottish Government, veteran Scotland is undertaking a mapping study of approaches to housing allocations and is investigating ways in which its own common housing register for ex-service charities might be adopted more widely. I will look to veteran Scotland and to the commissioner to work together and come up with innovative ideas, proposals and, of course, possible solutions. Addressing the needs of veterans experiencing mental health problems is also a priority. There is a wide variation in the reported prevalence of PTSD by the media and others often without evidence, but a study by the King's Centre for Military Health Research in London in 2010 on the consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan on the mental health of the armed forces reported prevalence of PTSD at around 4 per cent. However, I do not, of course, underestimate the impact of PTSD, nor do I trivialise the difficulties faced by those living with it. PTSD, of course, rarely presents in isolation and veterans will experience mental health problems similar to the general population, most commonly depression, stress and anxiety. Responding to those needs is just as important and we are taking action through delivery of a range of commitments in a national mental health strategy. We also continue to fund the commission service in partnership with NHS Scotland in combat stress for the provision of specialist mental health services, including an intensive PTSD programme at £1.2 million per annum. We also continue to fund the combat stress community outreach services across Scotland at £200,000 per annum, and we are providing veterans first point with £200,000 this year for its one-stop shop offering help and assistance to veterans and their families. The ranks of the unemployed too high by any measure are also not filled with veterans disproportionately. Service personnel do leave the military and many the vast majority go on to other successful careers. However, our ex-service men and women can also face a number of barriers that affect their successful transition back to civilian life. Of course, as with everyone else, unemployment can have a detrimental effect on a number of aspects of the lives of veterans. Disability, lack of transferable skills, poverty and housing problems can all be linked to difficulties in accessing employment, which is why this is an area that we need to address and support. Just to mention as well, sometimes the lack of awareness that some veterans have about the skills that they do have, which are transferable, is also an issue that we have to try to address. It is widely agreed that early intervention with veterans is key to a successful transition with potential barriers identified and targeted. Remployer has concerns that veterans are not utilising or recognising areas where they need help and special support. Therefore, we are looking at how to address this problem and target those who are most in need and help them back into work. Employment support is available for the most vulnerable ex-service men and women through the new service, Employable, created by Poppy Scotland and the mental health charity Sam H. All 32 local authorities are working together to develop local support services that link into the armed forces covenant while working with key service providers. A successful transition and integration into employment relies on easy access to services and relevant help being available. Elsewhere, the Scottish Government has also been making progress in health. We have implemented the recommendations of the Murrison report, a better deal for amputees, providing £2 million for a new national specialist prosthetic service. In housing, we have facilitated through grants large housing construction projects for veterans at Cranhill in Glasgow and in Carnoustay. On community justice, we have worked with Police Scotland on the appointment of an armed forces and veterans champion who has hit the ground running. Everyone now who enters a police station will be asked if they are serving armed forces member or a veteran and those figures will be shared with the Scottish Government. Veterans organisations, if I could just mention those coming to a conclusion, many of whom are represented in the gallery here today are an absolutely invaluable asset in the work that the Scottish Government undertakes. They are at the coface of support to veterans. They provide a wide variety of services and support that I witness across the country and it never fails to amaze me as does their inventiveness and their tenacity. That is why the Scottish Government supports veterans organisations. We have, of course, the Scottish Veterans Fund, which has distributed so far, around £600,000 to more than 70 projects to date. I have increased the annual amount available by 50 per cent to £120,000. It is for the same reason that I provided veterans Scotland with capacity building funding of £200,000 over three years. I look forward to continued joint working with Martin Gibson and his team, who are now better resourced than ever to take forward the work that matches their ambitions. Our approach to improving outcomes for veterans must be based, above all, in working in partnership with those organisations. I know that one of the concerns previously expressed in relation to the commissioner's appointment was to make sure that that appointment, that position in no way supplanted or undermined the work undertaken by our veterans organisations. That is absolutely the case. Of course, the veterans organisations are aware of that fact, as will be the new commissioner. That is the approach to partnership working with veterans organisations that I look to the veterans commissioners to take forward as he or she goes about their work, and it is also the approach that we, as a Government, seek to pursue. Our armed forces personnel and veterans have earned our respect, our support and, most definitely, their place in our communities. What I would say is—I have said this before and I hope that it has become a cliché, because it is certainly very true—that, when somebody joins the armed forces, they make an extraordinary commitment. They commit themselves to undertaking things that other people would not be asked to do. Given the extraordinary nature of that commitment, they are entitled to expect an extraordinary commitment back from us through the state and its various bodies. They put themselves in a dangerous way, and we have to recognise that. They are not looking for advantage, but they are looking to have any disadvantages that they may have through the service that they have undertaken and removed. We would certainly wish to do that. On that note, Presiding Officer, I would be happy to move the motion in my name. Presiding Officer, I very much welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate on the subject of armed forces veterans and the vital support services and charities that operate in communities in Scotland and throughout the UK. From the outset, I would like to acknowledge, as in the Government motion, the debt of gratitude that Scotland owes to those who have served in defence of freedom and to put on record the continued support that we, on this side of the chamber, gave to our armed forces personnel and the over 400,000 veterans in Scotland. I also echo and support the comments that the minister made about the real support on the ground that there was for the veterans returning to celebrate 70 years on from DEDA. We are committed to continuing to work on that cross-party basis to ensure that our veterans and families receive the support that they need and deserve. In particular, we recognise that our service personnel often need help with transition to civilian life, particularly in finding housing and employment, and a recognition that those who leave the service can bear physical and psychological scars for many years after their service ends. Being a member of the armed forces, particularly during times of conflict, is immensely stressful beyond anything that we can imagine. What that stressful situation creates though is a level of commitment and an intense bond among service personnel that is unique to our armed forces in this country. I could only listen and try to take on board when hearing from a soldier who had served in conflict what it was like to come under fire and the impact that it has on their battalion and their regiments when they lose a member of their own who is close to them as a member of their own family. I can only imagine how isolated someone must feel if they are discharged from the armed forces into society alone, perhaps with no family support after having such a close bond to the comrades that they fought with and possibly lost in combat. Going from living in such close quarters with people whom you considered family, eating, sleeping, working, socialising with that same close group to then be discharged into a community of strangers who tend not to understand military life and the bond between people it creates. As the minister said, the majority of servicemen and women make a successful transition to civilian life. The veterans that we have in Scotland are not a problem. There is an asset to communities. The minister is quite right to flag up that a lot of veterans have transferable skills that they perhaps do not realise that they have that they then become assets to companies and communities. For those reasons that I mentioned earlier, it really is not hard to see. Some veterans struggle to reintegrate and that can put a massive strain on family life for those who are struggling to adapt and for those without family. It is of vital importance that the advice and support services are in place for former service personnel to adjust to living in mainstream society and that we support those plans to co-ordinate and deliver support and advice services from the public, private and voluntary sectors for ex-service personnel and their partners and their children. There are too many fantastic organisations providing support and advice to ex-service personnel and their families to mention and do justice to all the work that they do. However, I would like to mention some, the first of which I have spoken about before, and they give the experience of what being an armed force. Armed forces reservists involve sabre, give advice and information on the extra skills that a reservist can bring to an organisation or a company to try to boost the likelihood of companies employing reservists. They provide weekend training courses for employers so that they can see exactly what kind of skills a reservist picks up on their training and then what they can bring back into their organisations. There is an open invitation from Sabre certainly to any MSPs who would like to go on any of those training weekends or be happy to pass on any details. We have to continue to support the organisations that do the tremendous work in the community for former service personnel across Scotland, including the Royal British Legion. The Legion provides practical care advice and support time forces personnel, ex-service men and women of all ages and their families. It runs the poppy appeal annually and recent appeals have emphasised the increasing need to help the men and women who are serving today, as well as ex-service people and their dependents. The Legion also assists any service man or woman to pursue their entitlement to a ward disablement pension, and every year up to 200 ex-service personnel in Scotland are represented at ward pensions tribunals. We have the Scottish veterans residence just across the road from the Parliament who provide residential accommodation to over 300 ex-service personnel and their partners. I have helped over 60,000 veterans throughout Scotland since they were established. The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association, whose Lanarkshire ranch covers my region in central Scotland, offer financial, practical and much-needed emotional support to current and previous members of their armed forces and their families through services such as the Forces line, a support service independent from the chain of command, so that serving members of the armed forces can go to their confidence that they will receive the support and advice that they need. They also run a Forces additional needs disability support group, an organised children's holidays run by volunteers, which offer experiences and activities that some of those children would not normally have access to. There is Erskine, the leading provider of care for veterans in the country. I am happy to be wearing my Erskine tie for the debate today, which helpedfully came through to the office about a week ago, providing fantastic services within the community. There are things that we can also do as individual MSPs to assist armed forces personnel, veterans and their family, to take up that offer and go on one of the training weekends with Sabre on Friday, with the support of the British Legion and other charities, the Citizens Advice Bureau, Combat Stress, Erskine, North Anarchshire Council and the Lanarkshire Armed Forces Association. I will be holding a veteran's surgery in Cumbernauld to mark Armed Forces day and bring those groups together to give advice and support to any veterans in the Lanarkshire area, certainly. Minister Keith Brown, in his last minute. For the support that you mentioned, there is also the early reference to the weekends, the training weekends. I am meeting with Anna Soobre, the UK defence minister, next week, and I will be asking her if she will allow the armed forces programme, which Westminster runs for its members, to be extended to the devolved administrations to give members more experience with the armed forces. I wonder if that is something that he would support. Mr Griffin, in the final 30 seconds. Yes, it certainly would be happy to come together with the minister and see if we can add cross-party to support to that scheme being extended. I will touch briefly. I know that the interviews for the new veterans commissioner have been helped recently, and I hope that whoever is appointed there will be able to build on the good work that I think has already been taken place by the Government in our veteran community. I will close as I open by acknowledging that debt of gratitude that Scotland owes to those who have served in the defence of freedom in our armed forces and that we will be supporting the Government motion at decision time. As always, I am happy to work on a cross-party basis to support veterans in Scotland. Yesterday, like many other colleagues in the chamber, I attended the flag-raising ceremony in my nearest town, which marked the start of armed forces week. There wasn't a huge turnout, but it was impossible not to be moved by the pride, passion and camaraderie that was so clearly evident in the small group of elderly veterans in attendance as they drew themselves smartly to attention as the flag was raised. That passion, pride and camaraderie is surely totally justified because it is almost entirely thanks to their selflessness, courage and commitment that we all now enjoy a comparatively safe existence in today's world as the minister acknowledged in his opening speech. It is absolutely right that the motion before us begins by acknowledging the debt of gratitude that we owe to our armed forces past and present. That the minister himself is numbered among them, I think, simply adds to the quality of the depth of understanding and interest that this Parliament has shown in armed forces and veterans-related issues since its earliest days. As I said in the debate that we had on the 14 January, that interest has been continued in a largely exemplary fashion by this Government and in a way that has been welcomed by the armed forces and veterans community. I would hope that that level of support and interest will be continued by this Parliament and its Governments of whatever political colour they may be in the future for many years to come. Further to the contribution that the minister made in the intervention of Mark Griffin, would you share my interest in having a scheme in the Scottish Parliament for the armed forces that I participated in in the comments and was excellent? Would you share my support that we should be looking at this on a cross-party basis? I would hope that these issues of all are ones that we can share on a cross-party basis and I would absolutely endorse that feeling. Those who put their lives on the line for our security in the past and currently deserve no less than our full support and I'm quite sure that we'd all agree on that. I think that everything that the minister said in his opening comment suggested that, certainly for the time being, that will be the case. I acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of ex-servicemen make a seamless transition back into civilian life, but there are many who will need and will continue to need our support and interest. One of the remarkable outcomes of recent conflicts has been the incredible response of the public. I have no doubt that that response has been prompted and in some ways even promoted by the fact that the media can now virtually bring the stark reality of modern-day warfare into our own homes in a graphic and previously unthinkable way. Indeed, the site of returning forces and worse, the funeral cortages of those who pay the ultimate price has undoubtedly awoken the conscience of the public in a remarkable fashion. Literally hundreds of charities have been established in recent years, all for the very best of reasons, but many of which one has to say overlap to a degree in what they seek to achieve. The result of that is that there is a growing element of duplication of effort that inevitably leads to a degree of competition between some charities in attracting the willingness of the public to donate to veterans-related causes. That willingness to donate actually highlights a further potential concern because there is little doubt that, as our involvement in overseas theatres of war reduces and the accompanying media exposure declines, the attention and interest of the general public will inevitably decline along with it. That gives us a problem, potentially, because, as I have learned all too clearly through the work of the cross-party group that I convene, many of the problems and issues that our veterans suffer from often do not manifest themselves until several years after their discharge. We could face a declining level of public empathy and financial contribution, alongside a growing requirement for help and support, as many of the issues that will come to light for today's serving personnel become evident over the next 10 to 20 years. Many of the larger charities already recognise that. I was very pleased to host a seminar in the Parliament just a few weeks ago at which the Royal British Legion Scotland, now known as Legion Scotland, brought together several of the main players in both the voluntary and the charitable sector to discuss its plans to restructure and to work with others in partnership to provide support for the future. Others are doubtless doing the same. That brings me to the role of the commissioner, Presiding Officer. As the minister mentioned, I did have a few personal reservations about the role of the commissioner, but I am happy to admit that many of them have now dissipated somewhat as I thought about the role more carefully. I hope that he or she will be able to ensure, or take steps to ensure, that the huge number of armed forces and veterans-related charities do not duplicate their efforts. If the generosity of the public is to be used to the maximum effect, it is essential that duplication of effort is addressed. My colleague Alex Johnson will speak later of the need for government, local authorities, health boards and others to all work together to ensure maximum effectiveness. However, I would suggest that the commissioner might well have a role to play in that process. All of our local authorities and our health boards now have dedicated armed forces champions, but there is a clear need for a more joined-up approach across the public sector, just as there is in the third sector if we are to maximise the support available to our armed forces veterans. Some of it is actually pretty basic. There are many local council switchboards that do not even know who the veterans champion is, so, if you ring up to get him, you cannot. That is not rocket science. Presiding Officer, in closing, I would just say that I think that the armed forces themselves still have a lot to do in preparing their serving personnel for discharge and for ensuring that they are fully prepared for the intense dose of realism that often accompanies the return to Civic Street. An awful lot has been done in latter years within the armed forces to improve this facet of service, but there is a lot more that could and should be done. If everyone, at both UK and Scottish levels, our local council health boards and the voluntary sector all meet the coming challenges successfully, then we can be as proud of the lifelong support that we offer as we are of those armed forces personnel and veterans to whom we offer it. That must surely be our goal. I am pleased to support the motion. We now move to open to debate. Very tight for time today, up to six-minute speeches. Please call Linda Fabiani to be followed by Ken Macintosh. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Of course, it is a very poignant time to be having this debate in the run-up turned forces day and commemorations taking place in communities across the country, marking anniversary specific to our Army Navy and RAF and the exceptional sacrifices that were made in World Wars 1 and 2. Of course, we should support our service men and women, past and present, full-time and reservist, and so I am pleased to support the minister's motion, particularly noting progress with the appointment of a new Scottish Veterans Commissioner to ensure the highest level of services and support available for our armed forces community. I understand that this ambassador will work with service charities, local authorities and health boards to identify any areas in public services that could provide greater support to veterans and help to shape future policy developments and opportunities. Of course, there has been some progress already made across public services. In health, among other things, there has been a raft of measures put in place by the Scottish Government to remove any disadvantage that is faced by the armed forces community in accessing the NHS. Priority NHS treatment for veterans both serving and retired reservists with a service-related condition and what was very important, ensuring that veterans can receive state-of-the-art prosthetic limbs, which are of an equivalent standard to those given by the defence medical services. Specialist mental health services were noted by the minister as well, and in partnership with NHS Scotland in combat stress, those services have been enhanced by the introduction of a six-week intensive post-traumatic stress disorder treatment programme. That is extremely important because PTSD can be something that happens immediately to someone post trauma, or it is something that can manifest itself a long way down the line. It is really important that those things are recognised. Having an armed forces champion in every NHS board in Scotland is extremely important. Of course, we have the same in local authorities, and I do recognise what Alex Ferguson says about it not always being apparent that there are these specialist people there to try to help to co-ordinate. I hope that, when we do, in fact, appoint the veterans champion, the veterans commissioner, that that is the kind of thing that will be pulled together and give much greater recognition to what is going on out there. In housing, there has been guidance for landlords, has been revised and highlights issues for ex-service personnel and gives landlords flexibilities. Again, I remember having a fairly long meeting with an organisation who dealt with such things. Some time ago now, who did have concerns that some of the allocation policies were patchy across the west of Scotland, certainly. Again, I would hope that, when we do have the veterans, I keep forgetting the actual name. Veterans ambassador, veterans champion, veterans commissioner—he's the one, she's the one—in place that that kind of thing can be very much pulled together. As with education, we have recognised additional challenges that face children of service families, for example, due to the nature of their parents' postings. I'm very pleased that, last year, there was £180,000 given for outreach projects offered through Army Cadets Association. Transport, the Scottish Government extended the concessionary travel scheme to include HM forces veterans with mobility problems. Again, I'm really pleased that, in the justice portfolio—I do remember Angela Constance prior to her being a minister of cabinet secretary and relative to her work as a prison social worker before she was elected, talked very much about some of the issues in prisons with ex-service personnel, who very often were suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and mental health issues, and weren't getting attention. Having a veteran and custody support officer operating in each prison in Scotland is an excellent initiative, and supplemented by the Scottish Veterans Prison Inreach group. However, it's not all one way, of course. I was particularly struck by the line in the Government motion about the experience and sense of civic responsibility that ex-service personnel bring to society on returning to civilian life. That is so very true. The excellent work of the organisations that support our armed forces personnel are generally spearheaded by ex-service people, the Army, RAF and Sea Cadets in many of our constituencies. In my constituency of East Kilbride, we have very strong cadet organisations, and they offer excellent opportunities for young people, again generally headed by those with military connections, as are many other voluntary organisations. Globally as well, global charities are often manned by those who use their skills, learning service and international experience to help others across the world. One that I particularly have unlimited respect for is Mission Aviation Fellowship, an organisation founded by a former military pilot with many ex-service personnel who work on the ground and fly to all the difficult parts of the world and help other organisations to take some support and succour to those who are most in need. I recognise the valuable skills of our service personnel, and I acknowledge the debt of gratitude that we should all have to order from them, and of course I support the motion. If I was a little slower than usual in rising to speak this afternoon, that is because I had the pleasure, if I may call it that, of leading out the Scottish Parliament's football team against the RAF on Friday, in a game to mark Armed Forces Day. If you are interested, following last year's parliamentary triumph, the Royal Air Force this year reasserted their hold on the trophy. I hope that both the minister and my front-bench colleague Mark Griffin feel suitably guilty at the gaps in our defence, which their absence highlighted. As well as allowing us, as parliamentarians, to show our support for the Armed Forces, the annual fixture has highlighted the support and indeed the affection that exists among the wider community and the footballing community in particular for our Armed Forces. Football clubs that have supported the fixture in the past include Kilmarnock, Hearts and Alloa. The latter club, of course, as the minister will know, pursues a policy of granting serving military personnel free entry to home matches. This year, we were very grateful to Ray Throvers for hosting us at Starks Park in Kirkcaldy. As some colleagues may know, Ray Throvers have marked 2014, the centenary of the Great War, by launching a new away strip. It is emblazoned simply with the word remember, and rather than the traditional team colours, it is designed in the green and black of the Hunting Stewart tartan, worn by Sir George Macrae's battalion. Hearts fans will be well aware of the service and sacrifice of their players in signing up for this original sportsman's battalion in late 1914. Hibs, Falkirk and Dunfermline joined them as did seven players from Ray Throvers, three of whom were subsequently killed in Passchendaele and elsewhere on the western front. Ten other players from Ray Throvers were also enlisted between 1914 and 1918. When you think of those numbers, whole teams of our fittest, strongest and most talented young men signing up in defence of our country, it is difficult to do justice to the courage, the sense of duty and the sense of service that those men displayed. But what I am also struck by is the desire from those of us who still to this day enjoy the freedoms that those soldiers fought and died for. The desire for communities today to do what we can to both recognise the sacrifice made by those in the past, but also to support our currently serving armed services personnel. This weekend, all three services, accompanied by the cadets and by veterans organisations, including the British Legion, paraded in Rooking Glen Park in East Renfisher, and local families turned out in their hundreds to watch the flag-raising ceremony and the march past. I think that every member who has spoken so far in today's debate has talked in similar terms of similar events in their own communities, revealing I believe the strength and the depth of this support. As well as the act of remembering what can we do to support, to give just one example, I am hosting our reception tomorrow evening in committee room 1. I was going to say after decision time, but I think that decision time is postponed, but during decision time, for a new scheme that has been set up to support and provide legal support to serving and retired soldiers. This was the brainchild of wing commander Alan Steele, a local constituent. With the strenuous efforts of his wife, Lindsay, he set up a scheme called AFLA, Arm Forces Legal Action. It has brought together a network of solicitors to provide discounts and advice for soldiers both serving and retired, and it has as its motto for services rendered. A fitting summary for this debate, I think. This is just one simple, straightforward but I hope very practical example of what we can do today. Retired soldiers do sometimes need considerable support to function in civilian life and support, which is not always as available as it should be, whether it is in mental health or help in finding employment. I believe that there is more that both the UK and Scottish Governments can do. Poppy Scotland recently found out that of the 189,000 working age veterans in Scotland, some 28,000 are out of work. That is twice the unemployment rate of the general population. As members have already alluded, it is often extremely difficult to account for the important and useful skills and experience that soldiers accumulate while serving, which makes finding civilian employment that much more difficult. When he was shadow defence secretary, my colleague Jim Murphy launched a very beneficial scheme encouraging businesses to sign up to a veterans interview programme. The scheme recognises that the skills that are gained in the armed forces are transferable but can often only come across in an interview rather than on a standard application form. Many businesses signed up for that, including John Lewis, O2, Celtic, Gregg's and Centrica, and they offered the first steps on the ladder for many ex-soldiers. Schemes like that are inexpensive to run, yet they can make a big difference. I would like to invite the Scottish Government to see whether we can do more in that area. Sam H and Poppy Scotland highlighted a similar situation in their recent launch of Employable, which provides local support training and practical advice to assist veterans in their search for work. It involves one-to-one and group sessions covering things like interview techniques and targeted support where necessary. Presiding Officer, there is a wider issue about the health and wellbeing of former soldiers, which again we have talked about. The Prime Minister has talked about Prime Minister's special representative and veterans affairs, Lord Ashcroft. What I found most interesting from Lord Ashcroft's recent research was that nine out of ten of every person thinks that it is common for former soldiers to have severe mental health problems and that it was a common occurrence for former soldiers to commit suicide. Clearly, that is a misconception, which has a negative impact on the likelihood of former serving personnel being hired into jobs or functioning normally in society. Stereotypes need to be challenged. The idea that soldiers have no skills, that they are mentally unwell or that they are unfit for certain types of jobs, by challenging those stereotypes, we can provide the right support that those men need. I believe that our communities expect us to do that across Parliament, clearly Parliamentarians want us to do it, and I think that our armed forces need us to do it. Now, I call on Willie Rennie to be followed by Christina McKelvie up to six minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I joined others in the chamber this afternoon to pay tribute to those who have served their country, have made many of them, made the ultimate sacrifice for bringing peace here to the United Kingdom. The fact that the peace here has been so enduring for so long, I think, is the ultimate tribute to their sacrifice. The fact that we have perhaps taken for granted that peace that we enjoy in the United Kingdom here on these shores is a recognition of their professionalism in the Second World War and previous wars before that. As the armed forces have reduced in size over the years, I think that our personal, individual contact and our awareness, our understanding of the armed forces has reduced over time. Often, you would not just read about deaths in the papers or hear about it on the news, it would perhaps be your own family member who had passed away serving their country. Now, it is a little bit more remote. Also, with the conflict in Northern Ireland, there was a reluctance by serving soldiers, airmen and sailors to wear their uniforms, and I think that that also made the armed forces a little bit more remote from our daily lives. I think that that is why we created Armed Forces Day, to bring it back into our lives, to make it part and parcel of what we do, so that we can show our appreciation for the armed forces and what they do for us, but also so that they can see how much we value them. I think that there is a great value in having Armed Forces Day, and that is why I will be at Stirling as well on Saturday to recognise the contribution that they make. Just to say on that point about making people more aware of the armed forces generally, would he agree with the points made by Mark Griffin, Dave Stewart and Alex Ferguson that the armed forces parliamentary scheme that he will be aware of from his time in Westminster could usefully be extended to this Parliament and other devolved administrations so that we can get that familiarity on an individual level with the work of the armed forces? Yes, of course, he can counter my support for that as well. I have actually joined the parliamentary scheme. I was distracted on other matters. I was part of the defence team on the defence committee, but I never took part in the scheme, so perhaps I will get a second chance to take part in it this time if they will have me. I think that that is the big, probably more important question. We were a bit reluctant to give our support to the appointment of the commissioner, mainly because we were concerned that that was just another appointment in the absence of real change. What we are really looking for from this Parliament is real significant change. When we are looking for change, what we are looking at is a number of different areas, first of all on veterans that many members have referred to this afternoon, but also in terms of personnel, serving personnel, both full-time and the increasing number of reservists that we will see in the coming years. All of that poses significant challenges that the Scottish Government, I am sure, will be fully aware of. If I can just run through a number of the issues on veterans, on combat stress, they have reported just this year that they have seen a 57 per cent increase in the number of referrals to their organisation just in one year. That could be a good thing. It could be the fact that perhaps former servicemen and women are overcoming the stigma. The fact is that they recognise that it is not something to be embarrassed about, so therefore they are more prepared to be forthcoming and get the support that they need. It could also be an indication, perhaps, that there is a greater problem, the fact that there is a greater number of people out there who need our support. We need to dig down into the numbers and the motivations as to why that is happening, but it is still clearly an issue, and the support that combat stress will require if they have seen that significant increase in referrals will need to be recognised as well. I have been to see veterans' first point at the other end of Princess Street if they are still there. They provide some excellent work. The fact that it is this kind of one-stop shop to signpost people on to other services, not badged as a mental health service, but there to provide people who need mental health support or any other support that they may require. Again, a good service and the Government deserves credit for introducing that. I would like to hear more from the minister as to how effective the priority treatment scheme has been for those former servicemen and women who received an injury while they were serving and what kind of extra support they are going to get. Is that just something that is there that is possibly available but nobody takes up, or does it actually have people benefited from that service? I would like to hear more from the minister at the end. I will also be joining Ken Macintosh at the AFLA reception tomorrow night. I think that it is a great scheme to provide legal services and support for veterans. That is a great scheme. The minister will perhaps also give us an update on the employability. It is quite clear that not all veterans are victims. Sometimes, if you read the newspapers, you think that that would certainly be the case. It is not. I know many who have gone on to well-paid jobs and are contributing greatly to society, but also to employment. However, the charity has sorted out that it is a collaboration of different organisations that have come together to provide an employability scheme. I would like to see what work the Scottish Government is doing to work with them. In terms of servicemen and women, just in conclusion, there is a real problem with servicemen and women who are forced to move around the country to different deployments, with getting the proper GP support, dentists but also getting into the right schools at the right time when their children are uprooted. Again, is the Government aware of if that is a significant problem just now and if so, how is he addressing it? I have to give credit to the Scottish Government. I think that it is working well with the UK Government. It was sticky at the beginning, but I think that it is now working well, so I pay tribute to the minister for doing so. Thank you very much. I now call on Christina McKelvie to be followed by Annabelle Ewing up to six minutes, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Like colleagues across the chamber, I participated in two armed forces events in Saturday in Hamilton, one organised by the local council, which is the flag-raising ceremony, and the other one organised by voluntary action south Lanarkshire, which was a coming together of all the organisations that support each other across Lanarkshire. Talking to some of the veterans who were there that day and hearing their stories makes you think about how hard-fought our freedoms are, and in taking the march past, I always seemed to be more taken by an RAF uniform, but I think that is more because my father was in the RAF, but maybe the minister would prefer me to say that a Royal Marine uniform is much nicer. Moving on and looking at some of the organisations that were involved in the event, which was an awareness-raising event in the centre of Hamilton, with lots of people there. We had armed forces there as well, we had the fire service there as well, and we had help for heroes, women's aid, Sam H and the citizens advice bureau, and the armed services advice project, which is a project, specials project, supported by Poppy Scotland. Members in here will be aware that I have spoken about this project before in a previous debate when the pilot ran in Hamilton. For information, the armed services advice project, which is normally known as ASAP, delivers an information service. It gives advice and also supports members and their families of all the armed forces community. They are throughout Scotland now, and they have a helpline. They do face-to-face case work in the cover nine regions. Some of the regions that they are now covering, Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, Edinburgh and the Lothians, Falkirk, Fife, Inverness, Murray and Nern, Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Stillenshire, Clackmannanshire and Tayside. They certainly have a great coverage now of the work that they do, and I would urge anyone in any MSPs if they are in their local area to go and see the work that they do, because they do a lot of signposts and they do a lot of the things that we have all called for here today. If that can be continued, it can only be to the benefit of armed forces service personnel and their families. The project was started in the first of July. In total now, there are 4,745 individual clients, which is a huge amount when you think about it. The financial gain of that is making sure that people have the right benefits that they are entitled to, they have the right pay-outs that they are entitled to. It is sitting right now at £3,241,000, which is a return of £3 for every £1 of funding that has been put into this project over that period. People come and get very complex support needs, and they come back in multiple occasions. Some of them have issues around debt and addiction, and there are many, many complicated situations that the advice staff work with. Over the four years of the project, the issues that have been dealt with are approximately 39 per cent of all the issues that have been for benefits, 19 per cent to deal with debt, housing accounted for about 8 per cent of the issues raised, and financial issues, including grant applications, were 10 per cent and 7 per cent were for employment. As you can see straight away, the work that gets done there, the wraparound care that gets taken to ensure that people get the absolutely right support. Interestingly, the figures on referral have changed slightly as well. Self-refero in word-of-mouth is now at 40 per cent, which is where you want it to be, because sometimes that is the best type of referral that you get. As the advice referrals are now at 11 per cent, SAFA has been able to refer 8 per cent of the people that come to them for specific items, the same with the Veterans Welfare Service, and other charities such as Legion, Poppy Scotland and the Armed Forces Welfare Service have all been referred to by 3 per cent of their clients, but it just shows you that 40 per cent of self-refero is probably just the men and women who have come back, who are veterans, who are transitioning out, talking to each other, and that can only be a good thing. A new project that has started and I laid a motion in Parliament that was a few weeks ago, and I hope that all members have taken the opportunity to sign that, is a new service, which is a service that is working with Police Scotland. Alex Ferguson had mentioned in his contribution earlier about 40 per cent of veterans that land in prison. Hopefully, that service will prevent some of that. Sorry, got it wrong. Just a little bit, if I may, correct what the member has said. What I do attention to is the fact that my understanding is the finger show that there was a 40 per cent increase last year in the number of veterans going into prison. I must have just picked you up wrong when I took my notes and I apologise for that. I think that this project will address those very people that Alex Ferguson spoke about. Police Scotland is now working with a wide range of organisations, specifically ASAP, and now working with the helpline. Police Scotland will deal with people in a wide range of situations, and the biggest issue is about keeping people safe. Some people come to the police attention because maybe of other issues going on in their community, and then it becomes quite apparent that there may be a mental health issue there, or a post-traumatic stress disorder issue there, and now the police have a direct referral to ASAP. Again, that can only be a very good thing. Early indications are that this project is working extremely well. I just wanted to finish in this year of 100 years since the anniversary. This is a statement to the House of Commons from Prime Minister Herbert Asquith. He said, and I quote, If I am asked what I am fighting for, I can reply in two sentences in the first place to fulfil a solemn international obligation, an obligation of honour, which no self-respecting man could possibly have repudiated. I say secondly, we are fighting to vindicate the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in the defiance of international good faith at the arbitrary will of a strong and overmastering power, and I think that the armed forces commissioner will uphold all of those standards and support and respect all of our service personnel. Colin Anabell, you are to be followed by Richard Baker, very tight for time, up to six minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I'm too. I'm very pleased to have been called to speak in this debate this afternoon. I do so also, like Alex Ferguson, as a member of the cross-party group on veterans, where I have taken a particular interest in the welfare of our armed forces and veterans since my election to this Parliament, just as I did when I was a member of the Westminster Parliament, where I was involved in a number of defence-related issues, including, of course, the widely supported but, sadly, subsequently unsuccessful campaign to save the black watch and the other Scottish regiments that campaign fell on deaf ears by the UK Government of the day. However, it is very fitting that we are having this debate today in advance of Armed Forces Day being held in Stirling on Saturday, and in this year where we remember, in particular, those who fell in the First World War in the fields of Flanders and beyond and what a terrible price was paid by so many millions of young men and what a terrible impact the war had on communities the length and bread of Scotland and of every country across the European continent and the wider world. We look back to, as the minister said, this year to the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings and the bravery of those who came ashore on the beaches of France to liberate a continent. There really are no words, Presiding Officer, to properly describe the heroic actions and the sacrifice involved, but what each of us can do is to ensure that those who serve their country are treated with the utmost respect and with dignity when they leave the Armed Forces. Here in Scotland, it is a matter of some pride, Presiding Officer, that we have a dedicated Minister for Veterans to ensure that, as far as we can, with the limited powers that this Parliament has, we can support the some 400,000 veterans in Scotland. As we have heard, the Scottish Government has made significant contributions to Veterans Scotland and through Vession Scotland to a number of important ex-service charities to support the excellent work of those charities. We also have had the 2012 Our Commitments report, or to give it its full title, Our Commitments Scottish Government support for the Armed Forces community in Scotland. That provides in Toralia for a co-ordinated approach across Government to planning for and delivery of devolved services for our Armed Forces community. It is important, as Christina McKelvie referred to, that we also include in that the families of our Armed Forces and veterans, because they play a very significant role as well, albeit not, of course, in the front line. There is also provision for regular meetings with Veterans Scotland, and there is also assistance to NHS boards and other public sector providers. Indeed, in the work of the cross-party group, there are recurrent themes, and one of those concerns health matters. It is very welcome that there is provision for priority NHS treatment for veterans, both serving and retired reservists, with what is defined as a service-related condition. However, at recent cross-party group meetings, there has been discussion on the parameters of service-related condition, and in particular where mental health issues present, which present not immediately, but sometime down the line. Perhaps that is an area that the Veterans Minister could have a look at in conjunction with his ministerial colleagues in the health portfolio to see what can be done to ensure that the implementation of the policy is as clear-cut as it can be for all concerned. Of course, reference has been made to other excellent provision in the health field for veterans, including the specialist mental health services in conjunction with the NHS in combat, stress and the NHS Armed Forces champion in every NHS boards in Scotland. There has also been a leaflet provided to raise understanding amongst GPs about what it means to be a veteran and the kind of issues that could present. In addition to the important area of health, housing is a key area that frequently is raised at the cross-party group. I am pleased to note that there have been a number of initiatives promoted by the Scottish Government, including the introduction of legislation on homelessness to ensure that employment and residence connected to the Armed Forces constitutes a local connection for the purposes of the legislation, and that there is priority access to the Scottish Government's low-cost initiative for first-time buyers' shared equity scheme. Indeed, the minister referred to the housing 50 homes unit, which is in Glasgow, and I believe that the minister also referred to developments in the currency. That is also to be very welcome, which will include social and transitional housing. Another area that has also been raised at the cross-party group concerns welfare issues. Of course, sadly, although veterans face many considerable challenges in the field of welfare, this Parliament at the present time can do very little about that, because we simply do not have welfare powers. It resides at this moment with Westminster, but hopefully not for much longer, further to, I would hope, a yes vote on 18 September. We have heard about the veterans' champions and local authorities, and I think that it might be timely to have a look at that again to see what further awareness could be raised and access facilitated to those champions who do a power of work, but I think that the role could be further explained and enhanced to the veterans' community that they are there to serve. I would wish, finally, to wish well the new Scottish Veterans Commissioner, whoever it may be, in their new post that the Scottish Government has created to bring a greater focus to all the areas of discussion this afternoon. That, in my view, acts as a significant marker of the Scottish Government's absolute commitment to do right by veterans in Scotland to ensure that they receive the help that they need. The people of Scotland, Presiding Officer, would expect nothing less. Thank you very much. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I begin by welcoming this opportunity to recognise the contribution that our armed forces have made to our life in Scotland and Britain today. When we look at the recent events commemorating both the First World War and the 70th anniversary of the Normandy landings, that brings back to all of us what a huge jet of gratitude we owe to all those who have served in our armed forces and what they have achieved together. We are, of course, approaching Armed Forces Day, as the Minister mentioned, to his contribution. That will be an important opportunity to celebrate the crucial role our armed forces are carrying out today in protecting our nation, as well as recognising all that they have achieved in the past. It is good that we can agree across the chamber in the sentiments in the Scottish Government's motion. I join others who have welcomed the progress towards the appointment of a new Scottish veterans commissioner. That will be an important role in building new relationships between all those who work for our veterans and ensure that the Scottish Government can play its role in contributing to that important work. We are reminded in this Parliament each year of the vital role played by charities who work with veterans through the work of Poppy Scotland and the chance we have to commemorate the contribution of our armed forces on Remembrance Day. It is important that throughout the year we are aware of the work that is done by our armed forces and for our veterans. I am sure that all of us have met veterans through whom the transition to civilian life has not been an easy one for a whole host of reasons, those for whom experiences of combat has left mental and physical scars. That underlines the importance of the support that they receive, both from those organisations and charities working with veterans and the need for our public services as well, to provide the right support for veterans. I am sure that on this issue the veterans commissioner will also have an important role to play. Of course, while recognising the challenges that many veterans face, which the minister outlined in his speech, it is also important to recognise the great contribution to our communities that so many veterans make today. It was right to emphasise this, too, because, as Ken Macintosh talked about in his contribution, he said that the stereotypes need to be challenged. A number of members have made this important point as well. As a member for the North East, he expected me to talk of the vital role played in our community by the Gordon Highlanders. Gordon Highlander veterans today make a great contribution to our area and our local communities. The majority of the regiment's ranks were made up of men from Aberdeen and the North East who fought on battlefields across the world. In August 1949, the regiment was given the freedom of the city of Aberdeen, so Winston Churchill said that there is no doubt that they are the finest regiment in the world. In October 2011, I was privileged to attend the unveiling of a commemorative statue to the Gordon Highlanders regiment, commissioned by Aberdeen City Council at the city's castle gate. The sculpture of two soldiers is indeed a magnificent statue and it was unveiled by Prince Charles who had served as a colonel-in-chief of the Gordon Highlanders and is a patron of the Gordon Highlanders museum. The museum itself plays an important role in the city, and a tremendous amount of work has been invested in making it the excellent resource it is today. Not only is it a place to visit and learn about the Gordon Highlanders, but it is a centre for learning and research to focus on the contribution that is made by the soldiers in the past and to ensure that it reminds us of the contribution that we must make to the lives of veterans today. At this stage, I particularly like to pay tribute to the tremendous work that was done by Lieutenant General Sir Peter Gray, formerly commanding officer of the First Battalion of the Gordon Highlanders and subsequently general officer commanding Scotland, who has been instrumental in making the museum the great success it is today and is a personal mission to helping our veterans in today's community as well. And as important as the museum is in celebrating the history of the Gordon Highlanders, today the museum also offers activities for families and children and learning experiences for pupils to find out more about what life would have been like for soldiers in the Gordon Highlanders. And, of course, this outreach work is very important for our younger generations, as it is for all of us who have lived in times of relative peace. Unfortunately, I have not had those experiences, our grandparents' hands, so we understand better how that peace was secured and empathise more with the crucial role our armed forces play today. This work of the Gordon Highlanders Museum receives fantastic support from our local community in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire. It is right that, on a broader level, the work of Poppies Scotland, Erskine and other charities working with veterans across Scotland receives our support from this Parliament and the Scottish Government as well. I am pleased that that is exactly the kind of approach that the minister has outlined in his contribution and certainly is outlined in the motion that we are debating this afternoon. It is good that the Scottish Government is taking a strategic approach to that work, so that we can look to progress with the appointment of the Scottish Veterans Commissioner so that, as a society, we not only ensure that our veterans have the gratitude that they so richly deserve from us but, crucially, the support that so many of them need from our communities and from our public services as well. Many thanks. The last open debate speaker is Graham Day. After that, we will move to closing speeches. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The fairness and decency of a society can be measured in a variety of ways, not the least of those being how it treats its most vulnerable citizens and, of course, those to whom it owes the most. Veterans are one group that absolutely comes under the heading to those we owe the most. If we are honest, I am not sure that we can, as a society, say that historically we have done all that we might have done for them. However, in Scotland over recent years, that has been changing. As we all know, Scotland has a long and proud military history shaped by the efforts of those serving past and present in our armed forces. Like Christina McKelvie, I should perhaps declare an interest in the three successive generations on my mother's side served in the military, including my grandfather, who won the military cross while serving with the Gordon Highlanders during the Second World War. We owe a tremendous amount to the men and women of our navy, army and air force, and it is essential that we do all that we can to help and support them when they look to return to civilian life, whether at the conclusion of an extended period of service or as a result of injury sustained in the line of duty. We may not always agree with the conflicts in which our armed forces might have been ordered to participate, but that, in terms of our duty of care to them, is frankly irrelevant. Having placed them in harm's way and all too often subjected them to witnessing events and experiencing traumas, which can leave a lasting legacy, all too often one that, as Alex Ferguson mentioned, takes time to fully manifest itself. We must, as a society, be prepared to provide the appropriate support to those individuals as they seek to reintegrate into everyday society. As we have heard, there are approximately 400,000 veterans in Scotland, proportionately a larger number than other areas of the UK, which presents a challenge to Government, national and local. With 2,000 personnel annually learing the armed forces and seeking either to return or move to Scotland, that challenge will become even greater, albeit, as the minister pointed out, the vast majority of veterans integrate back into civilian life without significant difficulty. I don't think that there's any doubting the integrity of the response from the Scottish Government to this. With £600,000 having gone to ex-service charities from the Scottish Veterans Fund since 2008, a further £200,000 to Veterans Scotland to improve support for vets over the next two years, £2 million dedicated to the new national specialist prosthetics service and £1.2 million for the provision of specialist mental health services, a £2.3 million grant to SVHA to provide 50 homes in Glasgow, extending the concessionary travel scheme to include forces veterans with mobility problems, and, of course, the pending appointment of a Scottish veterans commissioner. The Government has very much backed its words of support for veterans with firm action. I'm pleased to say that, at local authority level, in my constituency of Angus South, Angus Council is also leading, for example, particularly in the area of housing, as the minister noted in moving the motion. Angus Council is currently building a number of wheelchair-accessible properties to be allocated to veterans in Cymru. The demolition of the old Camus house care home that the minister got behind the controls of a JCB to symbolically, at least, commence some months ago has paved the way for locating 11 council properties to be made available to the general populace. In conjunction with the Houses for Heroes charity, five were used by injured veterans. Angus Council has provided a third of the funding in the Houses for Heroes charity of the rest. I can tell the minister that the project has progressed to the stage where the foundations for the houses are now being laid. This is a project to be commended because it integrates housing provision for our veterans within the community. While the grouping of veterans' housing can offer an obvious peer support mechanism, it's important at the same time that we do not, in any way, ghettoise this. The message sent out must be that those locating to such facilities are very much part of the wider community and welcomed into it. I share the chairman of Houses for Heroes, Lieutenant Colonel Richard Callander's opinion that the partnership that is established with Angus Council is an example to other areas in Scotland. Of course, the council has gone beyond that with the appointment of a veterans champion in the shape of former black watch major, Councillor Ronnie Proctor, and the establishment of veterans first, which provides contacts and advice for veterans on topics ranging from housing to health to finding new employment and expanding their skillset. Can I make the point in case anyone thinks I'm praising Angus Council because it's SNP-wed? Councillor Proctor is a Conservative. His predecessor was, if I correctly recall, a Lib Dem. That reflects the cross-party support for the veterans' cause, which exists in Angus and is judging by today's contributions around this chamber. Angus is in areas during its bit, as is the Scottish Government. The unusual degree of consensus within this afternoon's debate has made crystal clear this Parliament's commitment to supporting our veterans community. As the minister noted earlier this year, we cannot rest on our laurels. More can be done and will need to be done in the future. However, the message that I think goes out from this debate is that the Scottish Parliament is fully aware of its responsibilities to veterans and is fully committed to meeting those. We now turn to the closing speeches and I call on Alex Johnston in six minutes. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is an important debate and one that falls in an appropriate time. I rise, of course, to support the motion in the name of the minister. I would like to add my weight to the comments that he made when he paid full some praise to those who have served this country over generations in the past. With the Armed Forces Day only a few days away and with the memories of the D-Day commemoration still in our minds, I think that it is very important that we do not forget the debt of gratitude that we owe to the many men and women who have served this country in military roles in the past. It is, however, something that we must take seriously as a responsibility. We have heard a number of people talk in this debate about the disadvantages that some people have on discharge. However, we must emphasise that most veterans fit in very easily when they come out of the Armed Forces. It is in fact the case that many of those who choose to serve their country are the brightest and the best and naturally acquire skills that they can take into the community thereafter. I personally know of companies serving the oil and gas industry in the northeast who are willing to recruit anyone who leaves the engineers or the signals regiment and will take them at the drop of a hat so qualified and so able they are at the jobs that they do. I also welcome the fact that the minister has taken the opportunity today to commit the Government to further support for the cadet forces. My memories of being in Stonehaven in the late 1970s at 9 o'clock on a Friday evening were that you did not see any teenagers that were out of uniform. We had the air training corps, we had the sea cadets and we had the army cadets all mixing in the square, making their way home from the meetings that night. I believe that the cadet forces play an important role and can play a more important role in encouraging our young people to take a responsible and positive attitude towards their role in society. There can only be good comes of that. However, as we move on, it has to be said that this Scottish Parliament has shown a keen record in showing greater emphasis on veterans' issues. I remain greatly encouraged by the work done by successive Scottish Governments and also the work done by the cross-party group on armed forces veterans, which has done an excellent job of engaging with veterans organisations. I pay tribute to Alex Ferguson for the particular work that he has done. I am also delighted to have been able to sponsor a reception for veterans housing charities, which took place in 2012, a group of organisations that have achieved so much but yet need to learn to work more closely together. Graham Day has already mentioned the fact that Angus Council has been heavily involved in putting together projects to provide homes for veterans. The project in Caernustia exemplifies the holistic approach that included engaging with veterans charities and the Scottish Government. I pay tribute to Councillor Jim Miller, another Conservative, who was the councillor convener of the Neighbourhood Services Committee, who drove through that project in its early stages. That leads me to one other thing that relates to the important point of co-operation between organisations. I mentioned that there was a proliferation of charities in the veterans housing area, but the proliferation of responsibilities that lie within covering for veterans when they need assistance is something that can, in fact, work as a negative rather than a positive. I would like to see greater co-operation and partnership working, not only with the Scottish Government and local government, but with the NHS and the third sector, so that we can bring those activities together in a co-ordinated way. It is a safety net that we need to provide, and sometimes that safety net allows people to fall through. It should be possible with a level of activity and support that we already have to avoid that problem in future, and a little work could go a long way in achieving that objective. It is also vital that we do not allow our veterans to go under the radar and ensure that there is an understanding of what needs to be done on their behalf. Our understanding of the issues facing veterans increases all the time, and we must do everything possible to make sure that legislation and assistance keep pace with the changing needs of our veteran population. They have done so much for us. We must do everything we can for them. The appointment of a veteran's commissioner is something that I think will go on to prove itself as an appropriate action. I think that the words that I used when the announcement was made were that I hope that having a minister for veterans with such recent military experience was something that would lead to improvements and strengths in our performance in that area. If we have a veteran's commissioner, the right person, in the right place, I believe that many of those problems can be brought together and solved. The final problem is one that I have mentioned previously and I would like to mention once again, and that is the pressure that our veteran services are going to experience in the next few years. It is a challenge of our times that, with the military withdrawal from the Middle East and the removal of troops from Germany to be stationed back here, coupled with the downsizing of our military forces in some cases, demands on veterans' support mechanisms will be at their height for the next few years. It is important that we ensure that that support is made available when necessary and tailored in order to deal with that bump in demand. I would like to close the debate as it opened by restating the continued support that we give to our armed forces personnel and veterans. I do not think that it is any surprise that there is such a strong support within Scotland for our armed forces personnel and veterans. That comes over loud and clear when you hear from personal contributions. Christina McKelvie, Graham Day, who spoke about the military background that they have in their families, as I have heard from members in previous debates. I certainly do not think that that is the exception. If he speaks to almost anyone in Scotland, they can point to some military experience or history in their family. That is the foundation of the support that we give to our armed forces and veterans in Scotland. I think that we do owe a debt of gratitude to those armed forces members and veterans and will be able to mark some of those key events from World War I over the next few years. I met Norman Drummond, the chair of the Scottish Commemorations panel, who is able to outline the key dates and events to commemorate the ones with a strongly Scottish dimension. I look forward to attending as many of those events as possible over the next few years. Those seven armed forces are asked to make massive personal sacrifices in their human rights and ultimately give up their right to life in the service of the nation. It is only right in return that Governments and we as a nation value respect and support our armed forces. That culminates in the annual commemoration of armaces day, when we stop to remember those who have given their lives in action so that we could enjoy the freedom that we experience today. Members will know that I spent some time myself in the territorial army, and I have to say that I have not had the same experience in any other situation in life. While I went through all that training, a reservist can not deploy because of other commitments, I cannot even begin to imagine that level of intensity and commitment to fellow soldiers who are in the front line will have experienced. It is hard to listen to people who have served in front line action and speak about some of their experiences. It is easier to understand the sort of conditions that people often come home with. You can only imagine how isolated sometimes someone must feel when they are discharged from the armed forces after being in such stressful situations alone, perhaps with no family and missing that close bond that they had with people they fought with. It is vital that the advice and support services are in place for former service personnel to adjust to living in mainstream society and that Governments continue to plan, co-ordinate and deliver support and advice services from the private, public and voluntary sectors for ex-service personnel and their families. I hope that the pending appointment of the veterans commissioner will achieve that and that it will work to pull together the work of Government and those voluntary organisations and charities across Scotland. I also welcome local authorities who have appointed veterans champions and are starting to deliver positive changes such as North Lanarkshire, who have amended their housing policy to recognise the priority needs of homeless ex-service personnel and their families, who have just been discharged from duty or to take the point from Alex Ferguson that there is no point in having that armed forces champion if no one is able to access them, if it is not publicised and that if members of the armed forces community or veterans do not know who that is and find it difficult to make contact with them. We should continue to support the work done by many charities and organisations across Scotland, and we have heard many examples of those today. We are committed, as I said, in my opening to working on a cross-party basis to ensure that our veterans and their families receive the support that they need and deserve. In particular, we recognise that our service personnel often need support with that transition to civilian life, particularly finding housing and employment and recognition of the impact that their tour of duty can sometimes have. However, not just the impact, but the skills that they bring to communities was raised repeatedly during the debate, in terms of Alex Johnson pointing out the skills that are in demand from companies. Linda Fabiani pointed out that the contribution that XREF personnel are able to make towards international development is an aid after they leave their tour of duty. That is not to be forgotten. I have spoken about what we can do as individual MSPs by supporting the organisations and charities that are operating in our own areas. I am doing my veteran's surgery, Ken Macintosh, and I flagged up the Parliament football team's match against the XREF. I know that the trophy is no longer in the Scottish Parliament. I do not really think that that is because myself and the minister were not there. I have the greatest respect. I think that it is because there were a couple of members of Colsaith Amateurs football team that were not there along with me to show up the leke defence in the Parliament team. That has been another good consensual debate on the need to support our armed forces and veterans community in Scotland. I will close again as I open by acknowledging the debt of gratitude that Scotland owes to those who have served in defence of freedom in our armed forces, that we will be supporting the Government motion at decision time and that we are willing, as always, to work with the Government on a cross-party basis to support veterans in Scotland. It is fairly clear from the contributions that we have had that there is a unanimous adoration for our armed forces community, and that does not surprise me. Although, as I have said in previous debates, members should be aware of how much that is appreciated by the armed forces community themselves, seeing that level of consensus and unanimity. As we have said, many members have said that every day our armed forces are there at the very trained and equipped to do what is necessary, and they are based on our communities, they contribute to our economies and they live as our neighbours and our friends, and they are an integral part of our society. Rather than read the remarks that I was going to make, I will try to answer as many of the points that were made as possible. I apologise if I do not, but if I do not mention the points that were made by members, please be assured that we will be taking those up. First of all, to Mark Griffin, to Dave Stewart, to Alex Ferguson and to Willie Rennie. I am very pleased about the consensus that there is on the need to have the armed forces parliamentary scheme extended to the devolved administrations. I think for the reasons that Willie Rennie himself said, which means that we ourselves can become more familiar with the work of the armed forces by actually experiencing it. If members have mentioned or are happy to do it, I am more than happy to put round a letter that I will take to see Anasubri with next week when I make that case. I will send it out and if members feel able to sign that, that would be great. I am very grateful for the minister giving way and I strongly support the minister's view on the armed forces scheme. As I said earlier, I was great privileged to spend two terms with the RAF in my time at Westminster. Has the minister any plans to meet Sir Neil Thorne, who chairs the armed forces parliamentary scheme? If not, could he suggest that he does meet him to talk about the costs and practicalities of extending the scheme to the Scottish Parliament? I think that that is a very worthwhile suggestion and I undertake to look into that. Our previous representations have been made at ministerial and MOD level, but we will take that point forward. I can also very quickly pay tribute to Alex Ferguson and also to Annabelle Ewing for their work on the cross-party group, which I was a founding member of in the last parliamentary. I think that there is very good work. Alex Ferguson made, I think, a very important point about duplication amongst the charities. I think that it is a fine point, but of course his concern last time with the appointment with the commissioner was that the commissioner himself did not usurp or undermine the role of the charity. I think that, of course, I take on board the point that he makes and I know the point very well, 500 plus charities ensuring that there is not duplication. I think that that is going to have to be for the charities themselves to do and it is best done by them to look at what they are doing, how they can maximise and focus their work on that, rather than anything that would be imposed either by Government or by the commissioner. I am happy to give way. Alex Ferguson. I am grateful to the minister again for giving way and I absolutely understand what he says. Would he not think that there might be a role for the commissioner in guiding people towards that coming together in order to address that problem? In other words, does he not think that there may be a need for a sort of central focus on what these very disparate and diverse charities need to do? Of course, the charities themselves are governed by Oscar as much as they are by anybody else, but I think that the point that he makes is a well-made one, but I think that it is really down to Veteran Scotland, which is the organisation that would bring those together to take on that role, and I am happy to see that happen. A number of points are made by members. First of all, Ken Macintosh mentioned the Hunting Stuart tartan, and he will know, of course, that our near neighbours across at the palace also have the ancient Hunting Stuart tartan, a very fine tartan it is. It is also mentioned by Christina McKelvie of how attractive the Air Force uniform was. It is indeed a very smart uniform, but I would have to say that there is nothing to compare with the Lovats and the Green Berries of Marine Commandos by being maybe prejudiced in that regard. Although it is fiction, if people want the chance to see what going back to Dede, which you mentioned at the start, was actually like I would commend, in my view, the Band of Brothers series, which is currently on TV, which is underpinned by the real-life experiences and testimony of people who actually experienced that as a very good idea of what the sacrifice that was made in 1944 was all about. A number of members mentioned the private sector and the help that they have done. Can I also mention Malcolm's, the transport group, First Group in Aberdeen, and also Vine, an organisation that I went to with Angus MacDonald yesterday in Grangemouth, which is the Chamber of Commerce, coming together to get veterans into new enterprises, an entrepreneurial aspect to making sure veterans can get fulfilling careers after they leave the service. All very worthwhile organisations doing great work with their veterans in a way that is fairly understated. Alex Johnson said that the oil and gas industry in particular uses people, including signallers, to a great extent in the North Sea. If only I had known that as an ex-signaller in 1983, my experience is not as recent as you can imagine. However, if I had known that, of course, the Parliament could have spared my contributions, because I could have gone off to a career in that. However, it is very important that the oil—the North Sea sector in particular is, I know from my own experience, recently going back to 4.5-commando, is often the first choice of many people leaving the forces, and they are looking for training support and diving support and things that will help them to move into that area, and we have been trying to help them in relation to that. Willie Rennie raised the important point about the priority treatment scheme. I would say to him that we do not gather those statistics. That would be quite an administrative burden on the board's concern, but I will ask the NHS chief executive to look at this further to see what he can find out. Again, with the appointment of the commissioner very shortly, we will have a central focus for undertaking that kind of work. The underlying point, of course, is that we should, when we take forward those initiatives, make sure that they work and that they are taken up so that I understand that point. There is a very good contribution. I thought from Graham Day, who mentioned his grandfather's time in the Gordon Highlanders. It is worth saying that having won the military cross, none of us should underestimate what it takes to win a military cross. It exemplifies the point, also made by Richard Baker, about the fantastic record that the Gordon Highlanders have. I would also welcome the support for all parties to the many initiatives that you have taken forward. I think that the emerging consensus in terms of the commissioner, I think that the points that were raised in the past, and it is absolutely right that those debates, although they are fairly consensual in nature, do throw up challenges. It is absolutely right that they do that. I was happy to hear the challenges to the points about the commissioner and some of the concerns that it might usurp some of the role of veterans Scotland. I think that we have tried to allay those fears, hopefully satisfactorily, but it is encouraging to see that level of consensus, because I think that it is something that is really appreciated, as said by the veterans community themselves, when they see their elected representatives actually endorsing that kind of consensus. I think that I would also say that in relation to some of the organisations that I have mentioned, one or two of them, one or two that I have not mentioned, although somebody else did, was the Scottish veterans residence just across the road from here, also represented in the public gallery today, and the other veterans housing providers who deliver very high-quality accommodation in all manner of support in situations that make a tremendous difference in the lives of so many veterans. I think that the points that I would make in relation to whether it is mental health issues, whether it is in relation to housing issues, unemployment or even representation within the judicial system, I think that what is extremely important in relation to that is to be accurate, because we can overstate the problems sometimes, and if we do that, we are not doing right by our veterans. We have to try to be accurate about the extent to which the vast majority do take up viable employment and have a very successful career upon leaving the forces, and that is very important to realise. Neither should we underestimate it, because if we do that, then we run the danger of not providing the services that are required. Just on that, Alex Ferguson raised a figure of 40 per cent increase in number of veterans in prisons. That comes from an FOI release to the Daily Record, which has done a tremendous job in highlighting some of the issues that face our veterans. That gave a monthly self-reported figure in the Scottish Prison Service, the statistical bulletin, up from around 150 in 2011-12 to 220-12-13. It advised that it is too early to say if there is any trend that is underpinned by that data, as data has only been collected since 2011. It is also self-reported, so it cannot yet say whether that reflects a real increase. It is an important issue, and we have to continue to monitor that. The work that I mentioned in relation to that will add to our understanding of that. As I said, the Scottish Government will continue to work with the military, the ex-service charities and the service providers. That work is easier to undertake when you have the level of consensus and unanimity that we have in the chamber. I look forward to the ideas and the new thinking of the veterans commissioner. I believe that that appointment will be very well received when it is announced. We are all working in partnership and pulling in the same direction. As we have all said, we owe our armed forces community our best efforts, our best endeavours and our best wishes. If we continue to work together, then we cannot work together to the point where Scotland becomes the best country in the world to be a veteran. If we can aim for that very high standard, then we will do well by our veterans. Many thanks minister. That concludes the debate on support for armed forces and veteran communities in Scotland, and it is now time to move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number 10430, in the name of John Swinney, on appointments to the Scottish Fiscal Commission. Can I invite members who wish to contribute to this debate to press the request to speak buttons now please? I call on John Swinney to speak to and move the motion. Cabinet secretary, you have eight minutes in which to do so. I am pleased to seek Parliament's endorsement today of the Scottish Government's plans to establish an independent Scottish Fiscal Commission as well as Parliament's approval of my nominations for appointment to the commission. In doing so, I thank the finance committee for the very thorough inquiry that it held into proposals for the creation of a Scottish Fiscal Commission after I announced my intention to establish such a body in evidence to the finance committee in May 2013. The finance committee's report has informed the Scottish Government's thinking on the issue, and I record my thanks to the finance committee for the role that it has played in scrutinising my nominations for appointment to the commission. The creation of the Scottish Fiscal Commission is another important milestone in the journey to enhance Scotland's fiscal powers. There is widespread international recognition that independent fiscal commissions play a vital role in ensuring the robustness and credibility of a country's fiscal framework. I believe that there is similarly wide consensus across the Parliament that the Scottish Fiscal Commission will be a significant and welcome addition to Scotland's fiscal framework. The commission will play the key role in providing independent scrutiny of Scottish Government forecasts of receipts from land and buildings transaction tax and Scottish landfill tax, and in further assessing the economic determinants underpinning forecasts of non-domestic rates income in Scotland. That will provide Parliament and the public with assurance over the reasonableness and the integrity of the Scottish Government's tax forecasts, which will underpin a proportion of the expenditure to be set out in our draft budget for the first time this autumn. I believe that the remit provides a proportionate response to the relatively modest devolution of fiscal powers under the Scotland Act 2012. We will, of course, keep the commission's remit under review, and I intend to review the role of the commission in relation to the Scottish rate of income tax prior to its planned introduction in April 2016. It is my intention that the scope of the commission will expand in line with the Parliament's tax-raising and borrowing powers. I intend to bring forward legislation within the present parliamentary term to give the commission a basis in statute, but it will initially operate on a non-statutory basis. I am strongly of the view that it is critical to the effectiveness of the commission that it is independent of the Scottish Government and that it is seen and understood to be so. I have taken actions to secure the independence of individual members and the structural and operational independence of the commission while it operates on a non-statutory basis. Turning first to the independence of individual members, I willingly accepted the recommendation made by the French Committee that Parliament should have a role in scrutinising my nominations for appointment to the commission. I will also make appointments for single fixed terms. The purpose of that is to ensure that at no stage will the chair or members of the commission feel, in any way, restricted in the commentary that they can apply to the issues in connection with the forecasts that are put forward from the Government for, in any way, considering whether they would be eligible for reappointment for the further term in office. The fact that individuals would serve only single fixed terms is a significant foundation of the independence of the fiscal commission. As I explained to the French Committee last week, the chair and members of the Scottish Fiscal Commission will be subject to a code of conduct based on the model code of conduct for members of devolved public bodies, which was approved by Parliament in December 2013. That will ensure that commission members are subject to the highest standards of conduct expected by Parliament, including procedures for registering and declaring any potential conflicts of interest. The commission will also be structurally and operationally independent of the Scottish Government. The commission will provide reports to Parliament and to the public on the reasonableness of tax revenue forecasts prepared by the Scottish Government. The commission will decide what analytical and secretariat support it requires and where it will obtain that support. Crucially, Scottish Government analysts will not be seconded to work for the commission. The University of Glasgow will provide an independent base for the commission, and I am grateful to the principle of the university for his support in that regard. I will ensure that the commission is an appropriate resource to fulfil its functions, providing a modest budget that the commission can deploy to support its work. As I indicated to the French Committee last week, if the commission comes to me to indicate that it believes that it requires resources beyond the initial estimation that I have made of an annual budget of £20,000, I will of course consider that sympathetically to ensure that the commission has the resources at its disposal to properly exercise the functions that it will have been allocated. The commission will have three part-time members, one of whom will serve as chair. I have nominated three highly respected, skilled and authoritative individuals to serve on the commission, and I invite Parliament to approve those appointments on the recommendation of the finance committee. I have nominated Susan Rice to serve as chair of the commission. Susan Rice is a distinguished member of Scotland's business community and will bring a wealth of commercial experience to the commission. She is a charter banker, managing director of Lloyd's Banking Group Scotland, and, crucially, she has been a member of the court of the Bank of England, chairing the bank's Audit and Risk Committee, demonstrating her ability to operate at a very senior level within the private sector and to ensure that, through her wide interests, she is able to draw to the work of the commission and accomplish record of private, public and third sector service into the bargain. I have also nominated two renowned academic economists, Professor Andrew Hughes-Hallert and Professor Campbell Leith, to serve as members of the commission, both of whom have been instrumental in much of the thinking across the world on the establishment of fiscal commissions that have been of relevance in supporting the work of individual Governments as they have established bodies of this nature. Professor Hughes-Hallert is jointly Professor of Economics and Public Policy at George Mason University and Professor of Economics at St Andrew's University. Professor Campbell Leith is Professor of Macroeconomics at the University of Glasgow and along with Professor Hughes-Hallert is an academic authority on fiscal commissions and fiscal rules. In considering my nominations for appointment to the commission, I gave full consideration to the potential for conflicts of interest to arise or be reasonably perceived to arise between membership of the commission and other offices or roles held by nominees. Particular attention has been drawn to the membership of the Council of Economic Advisers that is held by Susan Rice and Professor Hughes-Hallert. It is important to recall, Presiding Officer, that the individuals that I have nominated to serve on the Fiscal Commission are individuals with formidable and broad expertise who have been involved in a multiplicity of different functions in a number of different respects. They have built up those reputations and records of service based on the integrity of their actions at all times. I have been at pains to demonstrate to the Finance and Constitution Committee the very clear separation of role and function that would exist between the Council of Economic Advisers who would have no role and no locus in scrutinising at any stage the fiscal forecast that would be made by the Scottish Government in relation to the responsibilities of the Scottish Fiscal Commission. There can be no doubt that those three individuals will together form a strong and independent Scottish Fiscal Commission that can be relied upon to hold the Scottish Government to account for the tax forecast that we publish in our budget documents. I move that Parliament endorses the Government's plans to establish a Fiscal Commission and to support the recommendation of the French Committee that the Scottish Government nominations to the commission be approved. I now call on Gavin Brown to speak to and move amendment 10430.26. Please, Mr Brown. On those benches, we welcome the setting up of the Scottish Fiscal Commission. An expert body that scrutinises and challenges Government forecasts can only be a good thing. Sometimes there is a natural optimism bias of government of any stripe and having scrutiny of that, I think, is helpful and it allows that optimism to be challenged carefully. All three of the nominees put forward by the Scottish Government in my view are more than qualified for the roles that they have been put forward for. They have the knowledge, the relevant experience and the skillset that are required to do the job. That is not in doubt, that was never in doubt, and the cabinet secretary is right to put the comments about them that he has done in his opening remarks. The issue, though, from this side of the chamber is this. This independent Scottish Fiscal Commission will only have three part-time commissioners, yet two out of the three nominations also currently serve on the First Minister's Council of Economic Advisers. In our view, there is a potential conflict and certainly a perception of a conflict between an advisory role on the one hand and a scrutiny role on the other. Two of the three nominations would be simultaneously, and that word is important, they will be doing this simultaneously, advising the Scottish Government on economic levers via the council and then challenging and scrutinising the Scottish Government on the application of at least some of those economic levers on the other hand. It is worth looking at the work of the existing council of economic visors, Deputy Presiding Officer. It is a fairly small body with only nine members, and it is a tender, I think, in every case by the First Minister and in almost every case by the Cabinet Secretary for Sustainable Growth. From looking at the minutes, it is also clear that there are regular engagements outside of the formal meetings between members of the council of economic advisers and the Scottish Government, and in particular the Scottish Government's chief economist's office. How regular we don't know, we just know from the minutes that it is regular. Some of the items, though, I think, come extremely close to some of the work that might be done by Fiscal Commission. For example, in the September meeting of 2012, the cabinet secretary outlined a progress report on that year's draft budget, the budget for 2013-14. That budget approach was discussed, and this was two weeks before the draft budget was presented to Parliament. I think that it is highly likely, Deputy Presiding Officer, that if the draft budget is being presented to the council of economic advisers, they will naturally want to look at items of expenditure and, going forward, they will naturally want to look at the revenue. They want to look at non-domestic rates, the landfill tax and, no doubt, the land and buildings transactions act 2. Economic leavers is a standing item on the agenda of the council of economic advisers, and indeed it is one of only three core areas of work that they do. So this is a powerful body. This is a body that clearly has influence, and again within the minutes, the chair noted the welcome progress by the Government in responding to its input. One of those areas, of course, was the potential setting up of the Scottish Fiscal Commission itself. Deputy Presiding Officer, this new body with a challenge function needs to be and needs to be seen to be completely independent of Government. The cabinet secretary said that himself in his opening remarks, where he says that it needs to be seen and understood to be independent. In our view, that is a difficult thing to do when two of the three members at the same time hold advisory roles with the same Government. The equivalent body in London, the OBR, has faced criticism about its independence and, specifically, from the Scottish Government and even more specifically, from the very same cabinet secretary, who said on the record to the finance committee that, given that the arrangement operates on the basis of succumbent from the Treasury to the OBR, there is a justifiable degree of skepticism about how far from Government the office is. This is the case put forward by the cabinet secretary when a back office function was shared between the Treasury and the OBR. What we are talking about today are the decision makers of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the heads of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, at the same time holding advisory roles with the Scottish Government. In concluding, the Scottish Government can use its majority to force this through Parliament, but I believe that it has made an error in suggesting that there is no perception of a conflict. We think that there is a perception of a conflict if you are advising on Monday and then scrutinising on Tuesday. It is more difficult still when that applies to two out of the three members who would find themselves in that dual role. Deputy Presiding Officer, I invite the cabinet secretary and the Scottish Government to reflect carefully upon the amendment, to reflect carefully upon the arguments that we have made, and I close simply by moving the amendment in my name. I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Finance Committee in this debate on the establishment of a Scottish Fiscal Commission and appointment of Lady Susan Rice, Professor Andrew Hughes Halliton, Professor Campbell Leith, to serve on that body. The establishment of a Scottish Fiscal Commission was put to the committee by the cabinet secretary in May last year. In order to consider the options for establishing such a body, the committee undertook an inquiry in November and December 2013. As part of that, we heard evidence from a range of economists and individuals with experience of fiscal bodies. The committee's considerations benefited greatly from the experience and expertise of those witnesses, and I like to place on record our appreciation of their contribution. One of the issues that we addressed was the requirement that formal safeguards be put in place to protect the independence of the commission. Among those safeguards is the way in which appointments to the commission are made. As members know, we have an established process for public appointments in Scotland, regulated under legislation and overseen by the commissioner for ethical standards in public life. Indeed, the cabinet secretary agreed with the committee's recommendation that appointments will be regulated in this way once a commission is established as a statutory body. In addition, given the nature of the body, the view of both the committee and the Government is that the Parliament's consent to those appointments is required. In giving this consent, the Parliament should have regard to finance committee recommendations. The committee's report takes account of both oral and written evidence provided by the nominees and the cabinet secretary. The purpose of this evidence-taking was to provide Parliament with an opportunity to consider the professional experience and competence of individuals nominated for appointment. As those are the first appointments to the commission, the evidence also assisted the committee to understand more about the issues that will need to be considered by commission members before they can commence their work. Those include the specific remit of the commission and the staffing analytical resources that they will require to be able to fulfil that remit. The committee's report also highlights the importance of transparency in the commission's commentary on the Scottish Government forecast. The committee's effort of the view that any provisional forecasting in which the commission comments should be provided alongside the final forecast with an explanation provided for any differences between the two. This will be important in ensuring that both the members of Parliament and interested observers are able to understand the interaction between the commission and the Government. Crucially, this will show how the Government's forecasting may be revised in light of or informed by the commission's commentary. It will be helpful if the cabinet secretary responds to that recommendation and is summing up. Turning to the evidence committee took from one of the nominees, the range of issues that we explored included the individual's previous experience, what they view as the immediate priorities for the commission and how the commission should operate, particularly the view to demonstrating its independence. The nominees each brought individual perspective to those questions. That is, of course, expected, as a collective view cannot be reached until a commission is established. Development of the commission's remit and agreement of a memorandum of understanding are still to take place. The committee looks forward to continuing its scrutiny and contribution to the issues that have been recognised by the Government. The nominees were asked about any other roles or connections that they have that may give rise to, or be perceived as giving rise to, potential conflicts of interest. None of the nominees identified any such conflicts. However, some members of the committee expressed concern about members of the commission being members of the council of economic advisers. Gavin Brown has raised his matters through his amendment in his speech today, and other members may also explain any concerns that they have to the chamber. However, I would like to emphasise the view that was shared by the committee that all three nominees have the relevant professional expertise and competence to enable the commission to fulfil its role. A recommendation that is set out in the report that we published last week is that the nominees should be appointed. With regard to Professor Leith, all members of the committee supported his appointment. The appointment of Lady Rice and Professor Hughes Hallott was supported by a majority of members on the committee. In closing, members will have picked up from my remarks that there is still work to be done in establishing the Scottish Fiscal Commission, including important issues that will help to build the credibility of the commission's role. The committee looks forward to engaging with the commission and the Government as this process continues. Many thanks. I now call on Malcolm Chisholm for minutes, please. I also welcome the creation of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, and I'm very pleased that the Finance Committee and Parliament have a role in deciding who should sit on it, which, of course, is different from the council of economic advisers where the First Minister appoints. That emphasises the degree of hard and formal independence that is required of the Fiscal Commission. The Finance Committee emphasises the importance of the OECD principles of independence, non-partisanship and transparency, and emphasises that those principles must be seen to be being observed in relation to the Fiscal Commission. Without that, the public can have no confidence in the research or the findings of the commission. In view of that, I think that the Government should surely be alarmed at the number of people, including distinguished economists, who are unhappy about people sitting on both the Fiscal Commission and the Council of Economic Advisers. That is irrespective of the merits of the individuals involved. For example, Bill Jameson, in an article that has been widely read, said, does it not smack a little of running with the hair and hunting with the hounds? Many people, including members on this side of the House, have come to the conclusion that the Fiscal Commission should not just be independent of government, but independent of both government and council of economic advisers. For me, the central mystery of this whole debate and this situation is why the cabinet secretary thought that it was necessary to appoint two people from the council of economic advisers, and thus mired the Fiscal Commission in controversy from the very start. He himself has admitted that there are dozens of eligible and distinguished people who could have served, and Professor Bell springs to mind, Professor Ashgroff springs to mind and Jeremy Pete springs to mind. There is a suspicion—I will not put it strong—that the Government is more comfortable with economists who perhaps have a closer relationship with their own position. The Fiscal Commission will provide independent scrutiny of revenue projections and assess the economic forces underlying receipts, as the cabinet secretary reminded us, and that initial role will expand. I believe that, now and certainly in the near future, it will be impossible to have the hard separation that the cabinet secretary suggests between his work and the work of the council of economic advisers. The cabinet secretary said in committee that there was no occasions when advice had been offered in relation to taxes by the commission of economic advisers. I do not know whether that is true or not, but in a way it is quite a surprising statement, because you would think that advice on fiscal levers and policies is bound to come up in the council of economic advisers and also the consequences of certain taxation decisions. If they have not come up yet, they will come up soon. In committee, the cabinet secretary offered to exclude certain areas from the remit of the council, which is a task-admission that those overlaps could certainly emerge. Today, the cabinet secretary said that the individuals have a multiplicity of different functions, but only two that relate directly to Scottish economic and financial policy. There, we have the conflict that Gavin Brown emphasised between the advisory and the scrutiny roles. Although the cabinet secretary seems oblivious of this potential conflict, Susan Rice, to her credit in committee, was not oblivious but said that she was aware of the possibility, she would deal with it and that her role on the fiscal commission would take primacy. She has made clear that she is willing to choose and that she would choose the fiscal commission role. I think that Andrew Hughes Hallock should also be asked to make a choice between that and the council and economic advisers. If the amendment is rejected today, the fiscal commission will get off to the worst possible start, mired in controversy and, without the standing and credibility with the public that are central to the very concept of an independent fiscal commission. Many thanks. We now turn to short open debate. Speeches of four minutes, please. Tavish Scott, to be followed by Jamie Hepburn. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Many SNP members care about the perception of conflict of interest in politics and government. Certainly in the 1999 to 2007 Parliament, the SNP rightly held government to account on exactly that issue. Indeed, Mr Sweeney often led that charge. I might even say that he often had a point. Gavin Brown's sensible amendment identified the core problem in this government's approach to these appointments. I admire Susan Rice. I would certainly appoint her too, where I am in the cabinet secretary's position. In passing, such appointments are entirely devolved, so this government could have appointed two women and a man or even three eminent financial experts who are female. Had they done so, then the balance of women versus men appointed to public positions would have improved. Sadly, that won't be the case this afternoon. I don't know the other nominees, but from what I read, I would share the assessment made by Gavin Brown and Malcolm Chisholm that they are eminently qualified, but that surely, Presiding Officer, is not the point. Members of the commission should not be advising the government on economic policy on one hand and scrutinising government forecasts on the other. That, by any realistic interpretation, creates a perception of a conflict of interest. I am disappointed not just by that, but also by the commission's remit and resources. Scotland has a highly centralised financial state, and that is one reason why I certainly argued for a tartan office of budget responsibility. The UK government got this right. They divorced economic and financial forecasting, which can be manipulated by politicians from central government. They established an OBR. That is not a friend of any UK chancellor. It's not meant to be. The OBR provides an independent assessment of the nation's books for the government, but also for all representatives, for policy makers, for you and I, no such emphatic independent assessment is made of the Scottish Government's financial performance. Scotland needs that approach. We need to judge how best to spend taxpayers' money. Consider free personal care for the elderly. It is not affordable in its current form to say some who have studied the finances. That is not the case. The Scottish Government, instead of that kind of rhetoric, should not decision making by ministers and parliament be based on fact. A tartan OBR would provide that fact unadorned by political spin and manipulation. When Scotland gets past the referendum in the autumn, I would rather Parliament again look not just at the appointments, but at the limited, narrow and restrictive remit of the commission. I welcome Mr Sweeney's earlier remarks that he will review the remit in future. Robert Chote, the boss of the OBR, is by any stand as an informative commentator. We should want the same or indeed better for Scotland. The finance secretary says that he does not want the commission to step on anyone's tools, but many outside suspect he is thinking only about his own feet. I struggle too with the Government's argument that the commission has such a limited role and therefore can be likely staffed through a university with a negligible budget. Yet Revenue Scotland is being set up with all the panellope of law, with resources, with civil servants, and it is there to administer just a number of taxes. The contrast does appear striking. This Parliament has not got financial scrutiny of any Government right, not just in the past seven years, but since 1999. It is an area right for reform. This was a real opportunity to create a body to deliver scrutiny and accountability across the nation's finances. A future Scottish Government can do so much better and can believe in healthy, robust independent checks and balances. That is an approach that I would be pleased to support. I too would urge the finance secretary to reconsider to beef up his proposals and to make his appointments ones that we could all support on a cross-party basis, where no potential conflict of interest would occur. Last week, we debated the changes to the written agreement between the Finance Committee and the Scottish Government to the budget process, which is necessary due to the two devolved taxes, which will be an important part of budget setting and budget scrutiny. The Scottish Government will, of course, be publishing its forecast for the revenue raised by the newly devolved taxers. It is vital that we have a body providing scrutiny of those forecasts. That is the role of the fiscal commission that we debate today. That role will only be fulfilled as well as its personnel allows for. In that regard, I want to endorse the cabinet secretary's three nominees. Susan Rice, as a prospective chair, has worked in a range of senior roles in the banking sector since 1986. Before that, in academic management in America, she is currently a non-executive director of the Bank of England Court and a range of other work as well. In the evidence session at the Finance Committee, I was very struck by the depth of her commitment to the concept of public service. Too many overlooks are quick to dismiss, all too often, in a seemingly cynical age. I believe that she is committed to the commission for the best of reasons, and I believe that she will be an effective and engaging chairperson. Andrew Hughes, Hallot and Campbell Leith have two eminent economists with different complementary backgrounds. Both will have excellent appointments to work with Susan Rice on the fiscal commission. I consider it unfortunate that some believe that there is a conflict of interest for two nominees by virtue of their role in the Council of Economic Advisers. I do not consider that to be the case. First, I would observe that the Finance Committee took considerable time to prepare a report on the establishment of the Scottish Fiscal Commission. Nowhere did we make a recommendation about restrictions on who could be appointed by virtue of their membership of another entity. Secondly, I believe that, in evidence that they gave to the committee, all three nominees not only gave an undertaking that they actually demanded that their independence be respected. I believe that we should take that on good faith. Thirdly, I would recognise it by virtue of their expertise. All three nominees are bound to be in demand to sit on other bodies. The perception for a conflict of interest might always be there, but that does not mean in actuality that there is one. I also recognise the very different roles of the Fiscal Commission and the Council of Economic Advisers. I thought Malcolm Chisholm slightly misinterpreted what the Cabinet Secretary and I am sure that he will speak for himself at the end when he suggested that the Cabinet Secretary had offered to restrict the role of the Fiscal Commission. I think that the point that he was making is that he has already done that by virtue of the recommendations made by the Finance Committee and its report on the commission. Again, I do not believe that there is a conflict between those two bodies. I would also further recognise that all the nominees will serve for a single term. They will not be beholden on the decision of the Cabinet Secretary to be reappointed thereafter. I think that that further emphasises and reinforces their independence of operation. I also think that we should recognise that the Cabinet Secretary has taken on board some of the concerns expressed by some of the members on the committee about the issue of a perceived conflict of interest, where he is now saying that the Fiscal Commission members are going to be subject to a code of conduct that deals with registering interests and conflicts of interest as they arise. For those reasons, I do not believe that there is a conflict of interest in those circumstances. I also believe that the excellent nature of the nominees before us is that we should back the creation of the commission and the nominees before us. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I am now called on to the cabinet secretary to Fiverr Cognid be obliged. Presiding Officer, I am delighted to conclude the debate, which I think has been a helpful debate. The first thing that I want to say is that I think that Mr Brown has done us a service today by producing an amendment that addresses and communicates the nub of the issue that he has here. Often, we have amendments here that are used as cover for other comments, but Mr Brown has put forward an amendment today that fairly sums up the issues that he has marshaled. He has fairly set out the credibility of the candidates that I have suggested for nomination. He has remarked on the strength of those candidates and has focused the issue on his concerns about the perception of a conflict of interest with membership of the Council of Economic Advisers. I think that that is helpful because it does crystallise the debate so that there can be no doubt about any other issues. There are four points that I would like to make to Parliament, which I think capture why Parliament should be assured that the correct thing to do is to support the motion in my name at decision time. The first is that the Government has put forward, and I have nominated, three candidates of eminent capability with a breadth of experience and a demonstrable reputation of integrity and challenge in all of the work that they have undertaken. I do not think that any of that is disputed by anybody in Parliament today. Indeed, Mr Brown has made that point very clear in his comments today. Mr McMahon made it very clear in the comments that he made to the French Committee last week. We have candidates of undisputed capability and strength of reputation to be candidates for this office. Mark-um Tysum I certainly do not disagree with what he said, but I am still genuinely puzzled with all due respect to those individuals and their great abilities. I think that you have admitted that there are dozens, certainly a large number of equally eminent economists, so I am genuinely puzzled why they were overlooked in order to create this controversy. Without going through all sorts of names of individuals involved, what I can say to Mr Tysum is that I do not think that anybody comes along to be potential candidates for such a role without uncomplicated connections to other areas of work that they may be involved in, but all of them protect their integrity and reputation for independence by the way in which they conduct themselves in exercising their responsibilities, and that is the strength of the three candidates that I have put forward today. The second point is about a point of disagreement that I have with Tavish Scott. I decided that the Scottish Fiscal Commission should have a very focused remit looking only to challenge the fiscal forecast that we made in relation to those taxes. I accept that there is a different view that could be taken. I am much broader role. I was very clear with the French Committee and I think that if I read the French Committee's report correctly, I am in tune with the French Committee on this point that it wanted the body that I was suggesting and not the one with respect that Mr Scott was suggesting, however valuable that might be, so the focused remit is absolutely crucial. The Fiscal Commission will have the exclusive responsibility to challenge the fiscal forecast of the Government and there will be no opportunity for the council of economic advisers at any other stage to intervene in that process. The third point is the location of the Fiscal Commission in the University of Glasgow with independent support away from the Government. I have been quite clear and again that this addresses Mr Scott's point. If there are resourcing issues, I will address those issues to the satisfaction of the commission. Fourthly, the individuals are being appointed for one single term only. They will be free to say what they like about my fiscal forecast. They will be able to challenge them in any way that they would like to do so without fear of reappointment. I will give way to Mr Harvie. I am grateful. The existence of the council of economic advisers implies that the Government will, from time to time, accept their economic advice. Can the cabinet secretary tell us how he would bring real objectivity to the task of scrutinising the impact and the potential future consequences of economic policies that were in part, at least partly, the result of his own advice? How can that be done objectively? That is what Parliament is here to do, to challenge the view and the decisions that I take on issues in relation with the economy. In relation to the fiscal forecast that I make in relation to the budget, I am absolutely crystal clear that the Scottish Fiscal Commission and the Scottish Fiscal Commission alone have the power and the opportunity and the resources to challenge the fiscal forecast that I make and to make it in the interests of good public scrutiny in Scotland. The Government has put forward three candidates of eminent capability. Their appointment has been endorsed by the French Committee. I invite Parliament to support those nominations today and to ensure that we have a fiscal commission that can properly, fully and effectively hold the Government's forecast to account and ensure that the public debate in Scotland on this aspect of our budget process is enhanced as a consequence. Thank you. That concludes the debate on requirements to the Scottish Fiscal Commission. The next item of business is consideration of motion number 10356, in the name of Jovix Patrick, on the membership of the regional council of local and regional authorities of the Council of Europe. I call on Jovix Patrick to move the motion. In this motion, we have put decision time to which we now come. There are four questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that motion 1047, in the name of Keith Brown, on support for armed forces and veteran communities in Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is that amendment number 10430.2, in the name of Gavin Brown, which seeks to amend motion number 10430, in the name of John Swinney, on appointments to the Scottish Fiscal Commission, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed to. We moved a vote. Members should cast their votes now. The result of the voter amendment number 10430.2, in the name of Gavin Brown, is as follows. Yes, 52. No, 65. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed to. The next question is that motion number 10430, in the name of John Swinney, on appointments to the Scottish Fiscal Commission, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed to. We moved a vote. Members should cast their votes now. The result of the vote on motion number 10430, in the name of John Swinney, is as follows. Yes, 65. No, 50. There were two abstentions. The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is that motion number 10356, in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick, on membership of the regional chamber of the Congress of local and regional authorities of the Council of Europe, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. That concludes decision time. Will you now move to members' business? Members should leave the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.