 The next item of business is a debate on motion 8332, in the name of Keith Brown, on employment support for veterans and their families. Any member who would wish to speak in the debate should please press the request-to-speak button, and I call on Keith Brown, cabinet secretary, to speak to and to move the motion at around 12 minutes please, cabinet secretary. I'm delighted to open today's debate on employment support for veterans and their families, delighted in particular after having had the opportunity in the last hour or so to meet with a number of members of my old unit 4-5 commando who came at the request of Graham Day and to hear from them some of their concerns and questions about the role of the Scottish Government in this area. Members will know that the Scottish Government remains committed to improving support to our veterans and their families, and also, crucially, ensuring that they face no disadvantage as a result of their service, and that Scotland is also their destination of choice after that service. We take a whole-of-government approach to supporting our veterans and armed forces community across a number of different policy areas such as health, housing, employability and skills, and we're working closely together to improve and refine the support on offer to veterans and their families. Today I welcome the opportunity to lead this debate and provide the chamber with detail on the work that's been undertaken to support veterans and their families, particularly in relation to their employment and skills. Veterans and their families make a huge contribution to our local communities and to society, including the vital experience and skills that they bring to the workforce. We want to maximise the opportunities for them to do just that and to also try to address any barriers that prevent them from reaching their potential. I think that people such as Edward Mountain and others will know that, in the past, the families of armed forces members have not really been to the forefront of thinking amongst the armed forces community, but they are crucial to the good morale of those serving the armed forces and, of course, why should they suffer in terms of the employment prospects because a member of their family, a spouse usually, is a member of the armed forces. I'd like to first mention some of the employability services that benefit our veterans and their families. For our part, we remain committed to working with stakeholders, communities and service users to try to design and deliver an employability system that is person-centred and treats people with fairness, dignity and respect. In reference to that group, I've just mentioned that the families of armed forces members acknowledge the experience that they will have. It's really quite disturbing to think in many years recently that we have seen people who are nurses, teachers and doctors not being properly used given the proper opportunities. It's a benefit both to Scotland and to them if we can make sure that we address that. On that very point about getting the families and spouses of serving personnel into work and employment, I totally agree with all that, but in my last couple of visits to the area of philosophy, the biggest thing that they said was the problem was childcare. The real issue that's stopping them getting back into work is not the lack of opportunities in the workplace but the lack of childcare, and surely that's something that will have to be addressed as a matter of urgency as well. I think that this Government has done a great deal in relation to childcare. Of course, there have been some changes announced in the UK budget, which may allow for further changes in childcare provision within Scotland. Of course, the particular point that the member raises in relation to families of armed forces has been raised with me in the past. I have an open mind as to what we can do to further improve the current provision and perhaps we'll see how the UK Government's provisions work out in course and what the implications of those are for us here in Scotland. We, as I say, take a whole-of-government approach to this, and that would obviously include childcare. We also have our no-one-left-behind approach to transforming our employability support and our devolved employability service, Fair Start Scotland, and we are delivering support that is flexible and easy to navigate, that integrates and aligns with other services and that is driven by evidence and need. The member, Jamie Greene, has mentioned Losty Mouth. There was a case of two people from the RAF who were leaving the service who had between them come up with an innovative idea, a product that they wanted to sell into the defence market. We managed at that stage or they stayed in that general area, but too often we have people who the taxpayer has paid an awful of money to educate and to upskill that we are willing to see dispersed to the four winds rather than retain those skills here. I know that the member raised that in relation to childcare, but we have to make sure that we keep more of those kind of people involved and working in Scotland for the benefit of the Scottish economy. I would also like to mention the fact that our services aim to support those who face the greatest barriers to employment and that includes those who are experiencing mental health challenges as well as disabilities. We want to support them to gain and sustain fair employment and, on a point that I have raised before, it is not enough to say, even though we have, I cannot remember on my adult lifetime, that we have seen unemployment down at 3.1 per cent, so very low unemployment, but notwithstanding that too often in the past. Members of the armed forces, if they get a job, are then to be grateful for a job, but really the job that they get should be commensurate with the experience, the abilities and the skills that they have developed over their time in the armed forces. We know that individuals do not access services in isolation, so it is right that we take on the role of joining up those services and essentially hiding the wiring behind those services. We are continuing to work to strengthen the integration and alignment of services with housing, health, justice and others to create a more joined up and effective system to ensure that everybody in Scotland will do, including our veterans, give the opportunity to prosper and achieve their potential and give way to Alexander Stewart. I thank the cabinet secretary for that. You acknowledge, cabinet secretary, that we need to have a joined up structure. Now, one of the areas that has been identified is maybe the benefit system, and within your own benefit take up strategy, that acknowledged that veterans were less likely to access the benefit system that they are entitled to. How is that being managed? First of all, I think that I would want to mention, because the member has raised it, that there are a shocking number of armed forces that access universal credit. That simply should not be the case. You should be paying members of the armed forces enough that you do not have to access benefits. I would also point out that the reason that is crucial is because universal credit is often a passport benefit to other benefits. If that is the nature of the problem that the member is referring to, I am certainly willing to have a discussion with the cabinet secretary for social security to see if there are some barriers that we can tear down. Really, we should not be at the stage of members of the armed forces having to draw down benefits like universal credit. As I say, we are trying to make sure that we do that joined up working on behalf of veterans and their families as much as we can. We are trying to ensure that we have a holistic wraparound package of support, which can be particularly valuable to those leaving the armed forces. Our key worker approach can respond to the need for more intensive health support and advice. Just to say again, if we can just get to the stage where the MOD will pass on in advance of somebody leaving the armed forces, their health records to a local GP can save so much time and grief for people leaving the armed forces. If the GP can just be made aware of where the person served, any previous health history, then of course that can nip in the bud any continuing problems. All those factors need to work in tandem effectively for an effective transition, and our no-one-left-behind approach holds the importance of that at its core. Militia leavers can also access support through our devolved national employability service, Fair Start Scotland. That offers 12 to 18 months of tailored, person-centred pre-employment support, along with up to 12 months of in-work support available for individuals and their employers. Support offered includes access to workshops and guidance to utilising the transferable skills that veterans have gained during their service, helping them to identify the strengths and potential for their career roots. That is crucial, because so often in the past we have seen people coming out of the armed forces not sufficiently aware of the skills that they have. I have heard stories that we all have, where people say, I can run and I can shoot a gun, but there is so much more that people learn in their armed forces. If they do not understand that, they cannot pass it on to the employer and give way to Martin McPherson. Martin McPherson is giving way to the member. Would he not welcome a better transition from the armed forces side in giving veterans who are leaving a better understanding of their skills? You spoke about the GP record handover, which I think is crucial, but there are so many skills that members of the armed forces have and sometimes struggle to identify. Are not the armed forces best placed to at least signpost the benefit of those in civilian society afterwards? I absolutely agree with that point, but we have to work on what powers we have. What we have done is to develop and this, I am hopeful, will come up during the course of the debate. It is an SCQF framework that allows people a toolkit in fact, which allows both civilian employers to understand what a particular training course involves in the armed forces, and, crucially, for the veteran themselves to be able to articulate that in a way that is understood by the civilian employer. I absolutely agree that the armed forces, whether it is on health, employability or housing, should be doing more of what people are serving. I am pleased to confirm today that we have extended fair start Scotland provision for a further 12 months, meaning that people can continue to be referred to as support until the 31st of March next year. During those times of financial uncertainty, particularly those most vulnerable in society, it is even more important that we ensure that people have access to the services and support that they need. I know that they will welcome that announcement. It is also true to say that, despite most people transitioning successfully, we are all too aware of the challenges that some veterans can face. Sometimes we hear of difficulties in finding suitable and enduring employment, or that their experience and qualifications are not adequately understood and appreciated. That was part of the burden of my answer to Martin Whitefield's question earlier on. I am pleased to say that that toolkit that I mentioned was launched earlier on this month, the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnerships, new military skills and qualifications discovery tool, which is quite a mouthful. I am very proud to say that the Scottish Government has provided funding towards that. Much of that work was carried on by my predecessor Graham Day in his time as Veterans Minister. It helps employers and educational institutions to understand the range of skills and expertise that those leaving the armed forces have to offer. It is also worth highlighting that the timing of the tool's launch could not have been better because across the country and in many different sectors, skill shortages continue, and many employers are starting to realise that there could be a huge, untapped resource in terms of service leavers and veterans. That diverse group with a wide range of skills can help to address some of those shortages. The tool can help both them and employers to understand the contribution that they can make. Our national strategy for economic transformation sets out our aim to ensure that people have the skills they need at every stage of life to have rewarding careers. Of course, most people will leave the armed forces at a relatively young age with another career ahead of them. Service leavers and veterans can and must be part of that ambition if we are to succeed. We need to use existing talent here in Scotland, but we also need to grow the working age population. As part of that, we will implement a focused talent attraction programme, including targeted interventions, supported by the ministerial chaired industry advisory group to attract key skills and talent from the rest of the UK. That will include working with those supporting transition to civilian life to encourage individuals to make Scotland their home as they leave the military. New jobs emerging because of our transition to net zero will need new thinking and we know that many existing jobs will require new and enhanced skill sets. The Scottish Government has also committed to increasing the number of veterans it employs and we continue to explore a number of ways to achieve that, including through the Going Forward into Employment programme. We also had a stand at last year's career transition partnership careers fair where we had the opportunity to engage directly with armed forces personnel. I should say that every MSP here can do the same. I do it for my annual job fair to make sure that the armed forces are present and they are able to offer opportunities to young people and others in their area. It is also why in late 2020 the Scottish and Welsh Governments jointly funded business in the community to deliver a refresh of the capitalising on military talent toolkit to include information for employers on the benefits of employing military family members to go back to a point that was raised earlier. That toolkit looks to increase the knowledge of employers and how to employ partners successfully letting them know the particular pressures that a spouse, for example, of somebody serving the military may face, but also how they can continue to participate and progress in the workforce. We also remain committed to contributing to the forces families jobs website on which we provide links to adverts for Scottish Government jobs. We are committed to helping veterans to gain employment in the Scottish Government. We also have a proud track record in terms of reservists in the armed forces working within the civil service. We also launched our campaign this month, working with the business community to help employers to understand the benefits that veterans bring to the workplace. We have had the help in the past when I approached them personally directly from the Prince of Wales, now the king. We would certainly hope to see if we can continue that partnership to make sure that using his influence with some very large employers that we can encourage employers to take on more members of the armed forces. Our veterans and their families continue to contribute a huge amount to our society right across Scotland. I remain committed to providing the very best support for the entire veterans and armed forces community and I look forward to the contributions of members. I am responding to those in due course. Thank you for saying that. Thank you. Cabinet Secretary, did you move the... Moved. Thank you very much. I now call on Edwin Mountain to speak to and to move amendment 832.1 around 8 minutes, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I'm grateful that the Cabinet Secretary decided to move his motion so I can move my amendment to it as part of this debate. I'd also like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for using Scottish Government time to bring this debate to the chamber. While the minister and I have many differences, I think we share the fact that we both believe we served in the best parts of the armed forces in the world. I'm pleased that the cabinet secretary has listened to calls from members as well to hold debates on remembrance and support for services in our armed forces communities separately. They are both indolent, but they are both distinct in their own right, and they're at their own separate debates. Long may this continue. I'd like to pay tribute to everything that our armed forces communities do for this country. Their contribution is not just made on the front line, sometimes as close to home as we saw during the pandemic. That's why local authorities, I believe, should always celebrate Armed Forces Day, something that I note with sadness that the Highland Council has forgotten to do for a while, which is a matter that I'll be raising with them. We must remember that a lot of good that our armed forces do goes hidden and unnoticed. For example, we should never forget the very strong ties that local bases develop with their local communities. You only have to look at RAF Lossymouth, who hosts things like the Community Amateur Dramatics Club, and the fact that they were prepared to shift their fence to allow the establishment of a medical practice. If you look at RAF Kin Loss, they also play a large part in the local communities promoting good causes. We should never forget that the Army at Fort George provides training facilities for the best football club in Scotland in Vanessa Caledonian Thistle. Those are the hidden contributions that embed our armed forces within their communities. While our servicemen are always here for us, we should make sure that we support them in return. They are prepared to give their all we should never forget for our freedoms, so it's only right that we are prepared to support our veterans when it comes to health, housing and employment. It is, after all, a near small price to pay, but worth every penny. That's why I welcome the combined approach that has been taken by the UK Government and the three devolved Governments to create a joint strategy for our veterans. That collective effort deserves praise and shows how working together can bring about serious progress. We've reached the halfway point of this 10-year strategy, so now would be a good time to reflect on its achievement. In the recent years, we've seen the promotion of modern apprenticeships to early service levers, providing them with vital new skills and career opportunities. The tackling of disadvantages faced by veterans and families when they require social housing. And more investment in the Scottish Veterans Fund, which is crucial for supporting charities delivering support to our armed service personnel. To give credit where credit is due, credit must be given to the Scottish Government for the part that they've played in this. All Governments have played parts in this and they've all progressed well. The UK Government has introduced a relief on national insurance contributions for employers who take on veterans in their first 12 months by service. That's good news. The UK Government has also just launched a review into welfare provisions for veterans to identify any gaps or duplication in support. Of course, all of these actions are built on the principles of the armed services covenant, which we and the Scottish Conservatives propose should be enshrined within Scottish law. It is right to do so. Doing so, in my mind, would enhance the support given to veterans and their families, whether that's access to education, securing a home, building a new career or receiving the right healthcare. There's always much more that can be done and that's what we should strive to do and that was the point that was made to me recently when I met with the Scottish Veterans Commissioner. Homelessness remains a huge challenge. With the latest figures I believe showing that 640 veterans are assessed as homeless across Scotland. This is truly shameful. No one should be without a home, especially those who've sacrificed everything or been prepared to sacrifice everything to protect our country. I am encouraged that the UK Government is delivering a further £8.5 million of funding to end veterans homelessness in 2023 in England. I would like to see a similarly strong commitment by the Scottish Government and I'm not convinced that the refreshed veterans strategy goes far enough in this area. If he's able to state the proportion of veterans that are homeless as a proportion of the general population, and if he's saying that the work being done by a UK Government speech, should result in consequentials coming to Scotland for that work, because, after all, it's work that's been done. We have in this Parliament no statutory responsibility for veterans, so we choose to spend the money that we do. Should we not get the consequentials as well? Typical of a marine to try and ambush you and probably done it quite successfully. I cannot give you the exact numbers of the amount of people who are homeless in relation to veterans to other members of the public. However, as far as resolving homelessness is concerned, I believe that it's everyone's responsibility, and I believe that any help that the UK Government could be able to give to the Scottish Government should be given to them, because I think that it's vital that we ensure that veterans are not homeless. I'm happy to campaign with the minister on that point if he wants me to. Have I time to take another intervention? Yes, there's time in hand, Martin Whitfield. Very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank everyone in the mountain for taking the intervention. This is not meant as a criticism, but surely one homeless veteran in Scotland is one homeless veteran too many. Can I just say yes? Is that the simple answer? I think that it is the simple answer, because any veteran should have a home and should have access to a home, and I believe that it's wrong if they don't have that, so the answer is simply yes. I think that also when it comes to what else can be done is on the healthcare provision, and I do recognise that good work has been achieved in this area with the creation of veterans champions as points of contacts within NHS boards, but it is difficult and we need to get it better. I certainly know when I was discharged, my medical records never followed me anywhere, which was not to my advantage, and it's not to the advantage of any soldier if their medical records cannot be made available to their GP. There may be times, of course, when those medical records need to be removed, just for a security point of view, but I think in principle those should follow it. I would also say that on the champions within NHS boards, it is supported by the Armed Forces Covenant Trust, and we are able to extend funding for veterans champions through to March 2024. But there are big questions what's going to happen beyond that date, and it would be good to hear from the Cabinet Secretary when he's closing as to what the long-term support can be offered by the Scottish Government to ensure the continuation of this vital scheme. Finally, members will be aware, in previous debates, I've called for an end to a threat to the repeated historic allegations of abuse inquiries, and I've raised the issue of Dennis Hutchins from my regimen. I'm not going to talk in detail about this today, but I'm going to leave everyone with this simple question. Is it right that elderly and terminally ill veterans are hauled before courts to face legal action over the decisions they made to defend the country and their freedoms? Are we indeed comfortable that in facing these court trials they may well die, as indeed Dennis Hutchins did? I will say no more than that, Presiding Officer, except to say that we should never underestimate the dangers that our servicemen and women face, and we should never forget that they are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice. For that reason, as a country, we owe them a debt of gratitude, and we should also owe them the principle of looking after them when they've completed their services as they return into civilian life. That moral obligation falls upon all Governments across the United Kingdom. The five years into a 10-year strategy, I believe there's still work for this Government to do, but they have made a commendable start. For that, I would like to pay them credit. It is Labour's view that the qualifications, skills and experience of service leavers and veterans, whether reserve or regular, are undervalued and poorly recognised. The Scottish Government have a duty to right this wrong and indignity, and despite the unique impacts that the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis have had on many veterans and the laudal efforts of the Government to make progress, there is much more that needs to be done, and that is partly why we're having this debate today. To put in place the support that is tailored and to increase the funding to ensure that there's the capacity out there in our country to meet the scale of this challenge. All of us who feel passionately about supporting veterans must do more to promote the proper use of the term, particularly among early service leavers. Often early service leavers or reservists or those who have left under difficult circumstances struggle to identify or reluctant to identify themselves as veterans, which they are entitled to do whether they serve for decades with an illustrious career or undertook simply one day of basic training. When the Scottish Government announced it would include a question in the 2022 census about service and the armed forces, this was very welcome indeed, as it would give the opportunity for advocacy organisations and others engaged about these issues to tangible data from which to direct their outreach work. I hope that the cabinet secretary may be able to confirm when this data might be available. Deputy Presiding Officer, I wish to turn now to a celebration of the work that has already been done in the area of support for veterans and their families, both in employment and in other areas. I think that it's important to acknowledge that there is much good work being done already in support for ex-service personnel to take up employment in the civilian world. Large organisations such as Barclays, FDM Group and Network Rail have dedicated programmes for ex-service personnel to support a transition from armed forces working environments to a civilian one. Many other businesses, organisations and local authorities have committed to the armed forces covenant to treat personnel, veterans and their families fairly, and I'd like to put on record my admiration for those who sign this important pledge and most importantly adhere to those values. Of course, Labour supports establishing clear statutory targets to underpin delivery of the armed forces covenant to provide a central focal point for supporting the anecdotal evidence that we have out there of good practice. The organisations undertaking this work know that we in this chamber also understand that veterans and their families bring admirable qualities and values learned in the armed forces communities and apply that to their work to the benefit of all they come into contact with. If they are provided with the right support and transitionary training, veterans and their family members are worth their weight in gold and are some of our best citizens. Recently, I visited RAF Lossiamouth and our lookers garrison. There was a big issue raised, as was alluded to by Jamie Greene earlier, that supporting those who are currently serving to maintain their position with the resilience of their families around them is critical as well. That requires greater liaison between the Scottish Government, local authorities and the Minister of Defence to ensure that the adequate housing supplies available, childcare facilities are there and support for things like starting up local businesses or contacting local professions to get them adequate. They are adequately engaged and integrated into local communities. In Glasgow, SAFA and Glasgow City Council jointly support the activity of Glasgow's Helping Heroes. Since 2010, they have provided a holistic service, providing advice and support on matters including housing and homelessness, employability and training, financial issues, welfare benefits and health issues. I have witnessed first-hand the wonderful work that Rachael Trubble and her team do that is so transformative to service users. It is no exaggeration to say that their work can greatly improve and even save lives. Indeed, on Tuesday evening, it was my great pleasure to host SAFA's Glasgow Helping Heroes here in the Parliament to celebrate their work and consider the evaluation report commissioned as part of the organisation's 10th anniversary. In that report, a vital service enabling our armed forces community to thrive confirms that the social return on investment of such services is enormous and tangible. Researchers from the University of Stirling and Glasgow Caledonian concluded that for every pound that was spent on the Glasgow's Helping Heroes service, the social value of the result of this investment was £6.63. That figure was reflective of a time when Covid-19 restrictions were in place and it is estimated that, in normal times, the return could be as much as £11.68, an amazing return on investment and something that we should look at as a national exemplar. That is why I ask the cabinet secretary and members across this chamber to support the amendment in my name today. Veterans and their families are not any more likely to struggle with unemployment than those in wider society, but it is undeniable that they face unique challenges when working on Sylvie Street. A holistic approach to support model by Glasgow's Helping Heroes will ensure that all those in our armed forces communities can thrive and continue to make our workplaces more diverse and ever more successful. Should they wish to make additional points in their contributions or take or make interventions? I call on Graeme Dey to be followed by Russell Finlay. Rhyon indeed, Presiding Officer, to be encouraged to avoid brevity. Presiding Officer, as Edward Mountain did warnly welcome today's debate, as a Parliament, we have established a pattern of general debates around the armed forces and veterans community and their needs, expanded upon perhaps only when we are considering the content of occasional reports by the Veterans Commissioner. To have the chance to drill down into a key particular aspect of that is quite useful. I say that from a deeply personal perspective, because two years on from ending my tenure as Veterans Minister, I still retain a keen interest in all-matter armed forces and veterans community-wise. I very much look forward to interrogating the progress made regarding employment of the 2,000 or so serving personnel who leave the military and settle in Scotland each year, not to mention their families. The progress that has been made, of course, is entirely down to partnership working between governments, local and national, the public and private sectors and, of course, our veterans charitable sector, but let's be candid about something. This isn't just about doing the right thing by these groups. If we're honest, it's also about exploiting a talent source that none of us can afford to ignore. I'm all for acknowledging publicly those employers who make a virtue of recruiting from the armed forces community, but we should be clear that they do this not out of altruism, but because they have recognised, they are sourcing from a skilled and reliable employment pool. A few years ago, BT conducted a survey of their workforce. They looked at the attributes of the veterans cohort set against the wider workforce. They discovered that the former had a 40 per cent better attendance record. Well done, those firms and organisations who have a track record in this area. Let's see their involvement in the reflection of the employability of the individuals being produced by the services. What we need is more of those businesses and organisations, public and private sector, evangelising on the benefits of hiring from the forces. I know that the Scottish Government is actively encouraging that. However, having said all that, let me pay tribute to those employers who have looked beyond just those who are leaving the services and have sought to provide employment opportunities for spouses and partners of serving personnel, of which Barclays would be a fine example, because it can be extremely difficult for those spouses and partners to find worthwhile jobs when they have had to leave behind family support networks and have childcare responsibilities to consider. Of all the visits that I have made and the groups that I have met during my tenure as a veterans minister, few left as lasting an impression as those that involve the partners and spouses of serving personnel, be that at Faslain, or the self-help can-do-hub set-off at Lucas. If we or servicemen and women have every assistance to secure gainful employment when they move on, then our obligation to their spouses and partners while they remain in service is no less. That is why I very much welcome the positive relationship that continues between the Scottish Government and the Forces Families Federation and the on-going involvement in the Forces Families Jobs website. The Federation, as many of us know here, does sterling work promoting and advocating for those that it represents. To note the way in which a particular Scottish Government initiative has morphed since 2018, that is about work that was designed to make it easier for employers and educational institutions to recognise the skills and expertise of those weaving the forces. Initially, that took the form of giving military, specifically infantry, qualifications, a civilian translation, and that served those affected well. It has been developed into a more holistic approach. We now have the SCQF military skills and qualification discovery tool that the Cabinet Secretary referenced earlier. I think that I am right in saying now covers 45 job roles that are all told. The clear progress that has been made by the Army, for example, in career development work, in furnishing their personnel with formal qualifications, which will aid them when it comes to finding work when they leave. The Army has historically been lax in that regard. Perhaps fearful that providing those qualifications would encourage people to leave at a time when their retention and recruitment is going on. That remains a very big issue. On a recent visit to the same visit that Paul Sweeney made to your station, I was very heartened to hear directly from serving personnel of the qualification opportunities and the encouragement to go for those qualifications that they were receiving. Going back to the subject of morphing, the veterans employability strategic group has also undergone considerable change since the cabinet secretary established it in 2017. None of the least significant change was the adoption of a new co-chair approach involving the appointment of Sue Bonfrey, who was then an HR director at Barclays. As Keith Brown's successor, I made that appointment having been hugely impressed by the work that Sue had led at Barclays around employing veterans, but just as importantly, it spouses. The ambition was to have more private sector employers involved, not just those from the public and third sectors. I hope that the cabinet secretary in closing might be able to tell us of the progress that the VESG has led. Otherwise, I am going to regret highlighting my role in the changes that I noted. One of the limited number of positives to come out of the pandemic was the Scottish Government as an institution, seeing up close just how multi-skilled our armed forces are. I will recall meeting a group of army logistics experts operating out of St Andrew's house. It would be drafted in to support the NHS around distribution of key items. Chatting to the team, I encouraged them when they went out into the field not to compromise on their can-do attitude and approach, which they did not. The impression they left has been tangible. For example, I understand that, since 2021, around 50 veterans have joined the Government staff ranks. That is welcome, and clearly there is scope to building it, but the more this cohort's talents are experienced first-hand, the more I suspect it will be seen as an employment pool worthy of fishing in. That goes for employers way beyond the Scottish Government itself. I am pleased to see the Government fulfil its programme for government commitment to improve employment opportunities for serving personnel when their time in the forces ends and with a particular focus on the SME sector, because it is not just large companies and organisations who would benefit from employing those individuals. We have made progress on improving the employment offering for spouses of serving personnel and veterans, but there is more to do. I now call Russell Finlay to be followed by Christine Grahame. I begin by echoing the words of my colleague Edward Mountain and the cabinet secretary about the sacrifices made by veterans and their families, and to recognise both for their own service. A brave servicemen and women make immense sacrifices to keep our country safe and secure. They serve our nation with honour and distinction, and it is our duty to ensure that they are provided with the best possible support upon their return to civilian life. We are them a debt that can never really be repaid in full. We must make every effort to give the 250,000 veterans who live in Scotland all the support that they deserve. One of the key areas of that support is employment. Many veterans struggle to find work when they leave the armed forces despite having a wealth of skills and experience. That is especially true for those who have been injured in the line of duty, whether that be physically or mentally. Since 2021, the UK Government has granted 12 months relief on national insurance contributions to employers for new veterans who they take on. I also welcome the work between the UK and Scottish Governments in the area of employment. The joint strategy for our veterans launched in 2018 was a great example of what could be achieved when both the Scottish Governments worked together constructively on things that really do matter. As Chris Hughes of Veterans Scotland said at the time, it was particularly refreshing to see the Governments across the UK come together to take collective ownership of the strategy and put the needs of the veteran community before party politics, an achievement that has been widely applauded by stakeholders. This joint strategy will run for 10 years, but it has already been effective. Although, as we all acknowledge, we must continue updating and refreshing it as new evidence is gathered. In that light, it was positive to see the Cabinet Secretary update the action plan for veterans last August, and I expect he will keep it under continual review. The strategy has several strands, but one of the key themes was supporting veterans into employment and furthering the career opportunities available to them. The Scottish and UK Governments have progressed that key aim by working in collaboration where possible. A strong and positive example has been set by Skills Development Scotland's collaboration with the MOD. That supports career transitions and increases career guidance for armed forces personnel entering their resettlement period. I would be keen to see the Scottish and UK Governments explore any other areas where they can work together, especially in respect of employment opportunities. I would be supportive of any initiatives that could establish further collaboration of this nature. In my own parliamentary region, the West of Scotland, there are good examples of projects bringing together organisations across the public sector that seek to help veterans. I refer to a joint initiative between the University of the West of Scotland NHS Lanarkshire and the St John and Red Cross Defence Medical Welfare Service, which is a charity providing medical welfare to those who operate on the front line, whether that be military, police or the health service. The initiative was awarded a grant to examine how welfare support and technology can benefit isolated veterans. The UK Government recently announced that projects would share funding of £5 million with 22 other projects, all with the goal of driving forward cutting-edge treatments and technologies to support veterans' healthcare. Those projects have been launched to help the physical and mental health of veterans. It is a great achievement for the University of the West of Scotland to gain funding of this kind for such innovative research. I had the recent privilege of visiting the University's main Paisley campus to speak with some impressive young journalism students, which made me feel very old indeed. It was also encouraging to see the UK Government launch a review at the beginning of this month into welfare provision for veterans. This seeks to identify gaps in support and better align the workings of a range of support services with the needs of the veteran community. It also aims to enhance the quality of the services that veterans receive. I will look forward to the outcome of that review, which I am confident will improve the current system for veterans and their families. My party has also proposed introducing a new top-up benefit to support veterans in receipt of universal credit using the devolved powers that the Scottish Parliament now has over welfare. We believe that that should happen alongside an armed forces and veterans bill to further enshrine the voluntary armed forces covenant into law and guarantee access to a variety of key services. Scotland has long played a pivotal and proud role in UK military history. As I have already said, we are an enormous debt of gratitude to our service men and women. That is the easy part, but our gratitude must extend beyond warm words into firm action, some of which I have touched on today. It is commendable that the UK and Scottish Governments are focused on working together to uphold our commitment to veterans. I hope to see that continue. I am pleased to support the Government motion today and the amendment in the name of Edward Mountain. I now call Christine Grahame to be followed by Neil Bibby, Ms Grahame. I am privileged to have, within my constituency, Glincor's Barracks at Pennycook, home of two Scots second battalion in the Royal Regiment of Scotland, and across the road and up the hill at Miltonbridge Army Homes. I have visited both, but I will in due course refer to my meeting with the wives and partners and the particular issues they face. I agree with the cabinet secretary that their support is essential in sustaining the morale of our service personnel. The first obvious observation to make is that the term veterans embraces many different people. Those who have had a short service career, those long-serving, those who have been on the front line in places of conflict and combat, of peacekeeping and those who have not. There are those who live alone and others with parents, partners and parental responsibilities. There are those who have suffered life-changing injuries, those with combat stress and that list is not exhaustive. One size, therefore, does not fit all, but there are common experiences. First, I will touch on the issue of data, which is not a boring topic but fundamental to identifying the breadth of the challenges in meeting them. I note therefore that, for the first time in the Scottish 2022 census, there was a question on previous experience in the armed forces. As I understand it, this has yet to be published, but that will be very useful. What we do know is that there are particular challenges facing our servicemen and women as they re-enter the civilian community. From living and working in a culture of conformity, of structure, of obedience, of rank, of service tours, taking away from months and end and with housing and health access all provided, of guaranteed income, all contrasts starkly with a life in a civilian community. From tours taking you from family and friends and partners to the world of the civilian, where decisions, choices have to be made by you that perhaps were previously made for you, your home most of the time, you have to make your own health provision, find work, fit in, the comradeship that came with the job may be distant and you have to make new social ties. This is not just hard for you, but it is often very hard for family. Your partner or wife will have run a household without you for months and end, made all the day-to-day decisions even when you are on leave. There have to be adjustments all round. This is true of any children too. You have to fit back into a domestic household which function quite well without you if you have returned from some horror overseas. Factor that in. Yes, certainly. Christine Grimm gave me a very valid point. Does she recognise that one of the most challenged cohorts are the single early service weavers who I would contend are a growing issue for us to address? I tried to cover what the list was not exhaustive. Funding to provide routes to adjustment helps as well as all the person-to-person support. I note that in 2021-23 750,000 have been put in to support work in health, wellbeing and quality of life, and that has been expanded to include all veterans over 60 instead of 65. I want to dedicate the rest of my time to veterans, partners and families, especially if there are children. After all, wherever father, mother or partner goes, they often have to follow, changing homes and schools and adapting to yet another community. Although I have to say that Penny Cook has welcomed both in schools and the community at large those stations at Gleng Cross, indeed when the barracks were threatened with closure by the MOD, the community rallied round to save it and it has been reprieved. However, it is difficult for a wife or partner to hold down a career when they are on the move. Children, too, may find months of settling in one school and then they are off to another. Meeting wives and partners of servicemen from Gleng Cross, I was made very aware of the restrictions on their lives, which I made clear. They accept without complaint and supported each other, especially when a partner was being sent on a long tour to a difficult part of the world. However, apart from setting up online businesses, the mobility of their partners obviously prevented them in many respects from following careers. That must mean that when eventually their armed forces partners ended their final tour of duty, even more huge adjustments have to be made all round. On discharge, a home has to be found, JP registration, and I note the reference that the Cabinet Secretary made and Edward Mountain to the importance of the MOD ensuring prompt transfer of medical records. Then there are schools and not the least employment. This, while often two people, let alone any children, have to get used to being with each other 24-7. For some, this transition simply does not work. There can be marriage and relationship break-ups with all the fall-out that can be predicted. Some turn to alcohol and indeed drugs, perhaps leading for some in time to homelessness and even imprisonment. Lack of employment can be a major component of this. They have skills that can be carried over into civilian life and they should be utilised. Indeed, there are staff in here, especially in security roles, who have a background in military service. Deputy Presiding Officer, our veterans make this huge adjustment to civilian life and it is not just as central as it is just given the job that they have done on our behalf, perhaps including dreadful sights that they may have seen that they will carry with them throughout their lives that we helped them. I conclude by asking the cabinet secretary in his summing up, and I wrote to some extent he has already addressed this, how support is extended to a veteran's immediate family, the parents, the partners, the wives and indeed the children, when that transition becomes a reality with all the challenges that I have touched upon, both private, personal and public, which will undoubtedly follow. I am proud to speak in this debate that honours our veterans and their families and seeks to advance their important contribution to communities across our nation. This is an important and necessary debate on employment support for veterans and a rise in support of the amendment in the name of my Labour colleague Paul Sweeney. I agree with much that he, the cabinet secretary and every member has said. Over many many years, our service personnel have been delivering security for the people of Scotland and the UK at home and overseas. I doubt any of us would dispute that those who have served our country so well deserve the very best support as they make the transition back into civilian life. As well as the well-documented healthcare and housing needs, these days we also increasingly need to support veterans into employment opportunities, as Poppy Scotland and others have highlighted. Most veterans are no longer at retirement age when they leave the armed forces. Ensuring that our armed forces personnel have support and assistance to transition into employment is therefore vitally important. It is important that that journey is started and enabled as early as possible in the resettlement process. It is important first and foremost for the individuals involved as well as their families. As we have already heard, transitioning to civilian life can be difficult and disorientating for veterans, especially if they are also learning to live with physical and mental injuries. Employment is therefore vital, firstly for reintegration and mental health, providing a sense of purpose, structure and routine in one's life. Just as important as paying the bills and we need to recognise the current cost of living crisis will be having a particular impact on our veterans. Veterans have an enormous social and economic contribution to make to our communities. We have a moral obligation to those who have protected us and our families to ensure that we honour the moral contract that we have with them and their families during transition and beyond. Like Russell Finlayer, I represent West of Scotland and I am privileged to have many examples of civil society helping our veterans and organisations working to honour and support our veterans. Erskine, Scotland's largest veterans charity, has been caring for veterans across Scotland since 1916. Through their care homes, veterans, villages and activity centres, Erskine offers a very special blend of dedicated care, compassion and understanding to residents and their families. I have been proud to visit them on a number of occasions and I have been incredibly fortunate to meet many of the resident staff who are led ably by Ian Cumming. I was delighted in return to show a group of veterans around the building and in this chamber just a few weeks ago. Renfrewshire is also home to a remarkable new social enterprise that is blazing a trail in terms of veterans employability. Scotland's bravest manufacturing company is a division of the Royal British Legion Industries. The factory is commercially viable. It produces signs, panels and high-quality digital printing. It also provides opportunities for many, including veterans who are learning to live with an injury or disability. I have visited this enterprise and seen it from myself and a number of other members have done it likewise. It is truly inspiring and hopefully a model that can be replicated across the industry and the country. There are obviously more examples of great work being done by organisations and I commend them all. However, all is not well, care for our veterans cannot be left to civil society alone. If the first duty of government is to protect its citizens, then its next duty must be to protect and honour the men and women who do the protecting. It is unacceptable that many veterans continue to experience difficulty in accessing employment and skills development. I thank Neil Bibby for taking intervention and just to say that he mentioned the word duty. Of course, it is largely a moral duty in relation to the Scottish Government, but there is something of a legal duty in relation to the covenant. I just wonder though that if what is being said, we have a legal or a statutory duty, is he also willing to, along with Edward Mountain and myself, campaign to the UK Government to say that we need to have the consequential funding to further those services to veterans? Neil Bibby. I am happy to look into the further issues around the funding, because clearly if we have legal duties there needs to be the funding that follows from that. We must recognise the role our armed forces played in the pandemic, as Graham Day did. At the same time recognise the significant impact that the pandemic has had on many veterans. It is incumbent now upon both the Scottish and UK Governments to ensure that they have the support. They need to commend the employability initiatives and other actions set out by the Scottish Government in November last year. Although I must note that many employability initiatives are delivered through local employability partnerships at a local authority level. In terms of funding, the appalling cuts inflicted upon councils in last month's budget therefore appear to represent a lack of joined-up thinking in that regard. There are other practical issues that we need to consider. Jamie Greene mentioned childcare at the very start of the debate. For example, we need to connect our veterans to support via transport. How do we support veterans to connect that support when, on a practical measure, the bus stop at Erskine's veterans village has been moved too far away from many residents and visitors to comfortably reach it? That is an issue that has been raised with me by my constituent James Gillies that highlights the deficiencies in our bus services. The need for people not just to have bus passes but buses on which to use them, and I hope that the bus companies involved will reconsider what is happening there. The UK Government, unfortunately, meanwhile, has broken too many promises to our veterans over the past 13 years, as highlighted repeatedly by John A. Mercer MP. There are missed waiting time targets on veterans' mental health, a failure to deliver ID cards to speed up access to vital services, and many former personnel report negative experiences when claiming compensation. The Armed Forces Act meanwhile places a duty to deliver the armed forces covenant on all manner of public bodies, but many veterans I speak to feel it lets the UK Government ministers off the hook. Scottish Labour, by contrast, supports establishing clear statutory targets to underpin delivery of the armed forces covenant. A future UK Labour Government is fully committed to fully incorporating the armed forces covenant into law and scrapping visa fees for non-UK veterans and their families after four years of service. Labour has also launched a UK-wide listening campaign, Veterans Voices. Above all, we must work with veterans to ensure that they receive the employability and other support that they deserve. To ensure that, at both Scottish and UK Government levels, we fulfil the sacred moral contract that our society makes with those who serve. I am pleased to speak in this debate this afternoon that acknowledges the significant contribution that veterans make on their return to civilian life following service in our military. Men and women leave the military for very different reasons—injury, ill health, personal circumstances—on completion of their service. For many, their circumstances are such that they can consider and embark on a new work life. By virtue of their training, their job roles and experiences, many service leavers return with invaluable skills, qualifications and knowledge, mechanics, engineers, doctors, players, and so on. Leavers also have highly developed personal skills, effective communication, problem-solving, the ability to work in a team, leadership, all transferrable into a new and fulfilling work role that will benefit those who work in a team. The ability to work in a team, leadership, all transferrable into a new and fulfilling work role that will benefit those who work in a team, leadership, and so on. Of course, underpinning, a successful transition, are the people who stand beside them—their families—that have also essentially served their country. Partners are an important protective factor, providing emotional, practical and educational services. However, we know for some that transition can be very difficult. Compromised mental and physical health, alcohol use, domestic abuse, personal debt and even grievance are well-documented vulnerabilities. That can take their toll at a time of great change. An added vulnerability factor for many is the current cost of living crime. I am pleased that the Scottish Government's veterans fund has supported a range of fantastic projects for veterans. Over a number of years, four veterans have been doubled this year to ensure that veterans and their families have the support that they need. The extent to which we have been able to support veterans and their families is the same. I am pleased that the Veterans Employability Strategic Group now has membership from the private sector, which is an important step in recognising the benefit of employing veterans, not least of all as we grapple with them. I am pleased that we have been able to support veterans and their families. I am pleased that the Veterans Employability Strategic Group now has membership from the private sector, which is an important step in recognising the benefit of employing veterans, not least of all as we grapple with labour shortages across Scotland. The energy sector is one of the fastest growing sectors in our economy and already offering many employment opportunities suited to former and transitioning military personnel. According to Dr Alex Thom, a workforce employment manager for offshore energies UK, the energy sector provides highly skilled and well-rewarded employment opportunities. To meet its future commitments, the sector is already working to match industry job profiles with military roles, identifying transferable positions and training and conversion opportunities. Energy firms are increasingly recognising the benefits of recruiting men and women from the armed forces. Qualities such as team leadership, organisational skills and technical knowledge are all highly prized by the sector and career opportunities exist in the fields of engineering, project management, health and safety and the skilled trades. In my constituency in the north-east, I regularly speak to energy sector businesses that are actively recruiting a broad range of talent and skills in an extremely competitive labour market. As such, our veteran community has a strong contribution to make to our Scottish renewables industry. Earlier this week, I visited the newly constructed South Harbour in my constituency and heard that Port of Aberdeen proactively promotes employment opportunities to groups that represent military veterans. Another sector actively recruiting veterans is the cyber space. Cyber security is a growing industry with cyber attacks becoming a growing concern for businesses in all sectors in Scotland. Scotland does not exempt from that. The security training, experience and skills service leavers have makes them an ideal candidate for a range of cyber and information security roles. There are clear parallels. Cyber security requires analysis of threats and vulnerabilities. Veterans not only live and breathe security, but they may also have personal and professional qualities that lend themselves to that role. I will make some very good points. I will just tell her to develop her theme about particular talents. Arion Condor, the four-five commander who Keith Brown and I met today, it emerged that their talents are around health and safety because of what they carry out, have a translation into civilian life, but also mental health support because of the trim training. I think that she makes a very good point about that. I wonder if she would acknowledge the point that I have made. I thank Graham Dave for his intervention and I would absolutely agree with the point that he is making that not only are veterans bringing professional experience but they are bringing many personal attributes just as you have highlighted. Some veterans will also have existing security clearances and leave the military with IT and cybersecurity qualifications that mean that they can literally walk into a new role. Those are only two examples of sectors benefiting from our veteran community. I am acutely aware that pathways to employment can still be challenging for many service leavers. I was pleased to hear about the range of employment support outlined by the cabinet secretary earlier on in opening this debate. I am proud of the long tradition of supporting places in Scotland for veterans across education, housing, healthcare and employment. However, we all know there is much to do. To conclude, we owe our veterans a huge debt of gratitude. As such, it is incumbent on us to do everything that we can to ensure that they can access the support, training and education that they need. As a member of the military family myself, I will certainly do my bit within that. I thank the cabinet secretary and all members who have contributed thus far in what I think is a very good debate. It is not without its politics but should it be when we are in Parliament after all. It goes without saying that there genuinely is cross-party sentiment that we do a great amount of thanks and gratitude to those who have served our country and those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice. Not everyone is able to come back and be re-employed or readjust to society because many do not come home at all. We also have the great privilege of having amongst us those who have served, including in the two front benches here today, but also throughout the staff in the Parliament, many of us in our own political offices and throughout parliamentary staff either have served or even currently serve through the reserves. I think that we owe them all a huge thanks today. Of course, many of us, as we have discussed many times in this Parliament, have very personal experiences and relationships with the armed forces through friends and family who have served going as far back as the first and second world wars, but even more recently in other ways of service. As I was doing some research, as my staff were doing some research for me, ahead of today's debate, rummaging through the local papers, we pulled out some really interesting anecdotes and stories and the first one I did want to share and that was of Tommy McVey who was a Greenock pilot who shot down an enemy plane in World War 2. He was attacked by a German plane that fatally injured the pilot, a 24-year-old pilot, leaving Tommy to take control of the plane himself. Indeed, he managed to do so and made it back home. He survived. He got married. He had a wife and kids. In fact, his nephew is not one of the councillors in the Clyde Council. Like so many veterans, he really struggled and carried the weight of that experience with them throughout his whole life. I think that many veterans do, but don't share it and talk about it. Of course, those are the wars that occupy our TV channels, the ones that we talk about the most, but not all veterans necessarily go to war. Not all veterans were on the front line. Many people who serve also serve in places of famine. They serve in places of genocide. They perform peacekeeping missions and also work in a huge amount of natural disasters and, as we have learned in the last few years, pandemics as well. Trauma can actually occur pretty much anywhere that it is met with in many places and in many ways as well. I wanted to say that because I want to challenge what the overused notion of what is a veteran is. I think that there is a stereotype out there that is often used. It is often a male, somebody who is war-torn, somebody who is perhaps injured, somebody who is perhaps homeless or suffering from addiction or mental health, breakdown or PTSD and so on. Of course, all that exists and I am going to talk a bit about that as well, but I think that anyone who is retired from service and anyone who has come back into society in that way is a veteran, anyone is a veteran. Many of them go on to have great lives. Many of them go on to re-employment and opportunities. Many of them go on to the private sector. Again, I am going to talk about that in a second. Many even go back into the forces as reserves, sometimes part-time but often full-time. As they come back to use the skills that they have developed, they are all veterans too. So much so, there are estimates of around a quarter of a million veterans in Scotland. What we have heard today when you brush away the politics is the fact that both of Scotland's Governments have been working together constructively directly through ministerial level but also in the civil service, which is important. They will not always get it right and those relationships are not always perfect, but it is only if not just both levels of national government but also local government gets involved. Can we truly paint a picture of improving outcomes? I have name-checked the UK Minister for Defence for Veterans, Mr Johnny Mercer. I should also mention his wife, who has often got quite a lot to say, but it is important that there are role models and that people have loud voices and are not afraid to use them even within their own parties and Governments. We should have more of that in politics. I want to state that the reason that is so important is that, since 2001, there have been an estimated 2,000 former soldiers or veterans who have believed to have taken their own lives. That is quite a stark statistic. I want to mention it because, although our understanding of mental health and PTSD has improved over the years, it is still depressingly high. I thank Jamie Greene for giving me just two of the points of reason that I could just quickly intervene to say that, in relation to inter-governmental relationships, I have heard what has been said about the Governments working together. I have never known it as bad as it is just now. I have met with every previous Secretary of State over the decade that I have been doing this. The current one refuses to meet. I have had people just ignoring letters and not having meetings across the board. I suggest that that is a counterpoint to the fact that, as Jamie Greene said, there is some good work being done between the Governments. On the other point, of course, a veteran, the definition of a veteran is served even for half a day. The point that I was making in relation to homelessness, which she has mentioned, is quite right. Mark Whitefield says that every person that is homeless is one too many. On the general population, whether it is homelessness or mental health or imprisonment, veterans are no more overrepresented in those categories. The horrible notion of mad, bad and sad is not true with many veterans. The majority successfully transitioned to civilian life. Jamie Greene can give you that time back. Two very important points that I would like to reflect on. The first point is that, if that is the case, members of the Scottish Government are struggling to get appropriate communication. You are very right to raise that and mention it. It is very right that, in any way, we can feed that back. I am not a member of the UK Government, but they have a building across the road. I am very happy to feed that back in any channels that I have. It is not appropriate and respectful. I agree with you on that. The second point is on the issue of overrepresentation of veterans in states of distress, including homelessness. I am not hearing anyone on our benches making the argument that they are overrepresented, but they are there. The estimate was that last year there were over 600 veterans who were homeless. One is too many. Although I appreciate what the cabinet secretary said, he may not have a statutory duty to look after homeless veterans. He does have a statutory duty to look after homeless people, because ultimately there are citizens of this country whether they are a veteran or not. It is in that vein that I would like to reflect on that. I could probably go on for another six minutes so much more to say, but the issue of employment is the crux of the debate that we are having today. The question of that is why would you employ veterans? Why wouldn't you? This is the point that Graham Day made. What we are seeing is a bit of a brain drain in many of our armed forces, because many are seeing better terms and conditions in the private sector than they have been attracted to contractors and private companies. To even go and work for those contractors on the basis and the premises that they were once serving in so that they are disappearing out one end and coming in another. There is nothing wrong with that. It is good that it may offer them better opportunities as they move on in the future, but it does create a bit of a struggle to get people in the door in our armed forces. Of course we have talked a lot about families and children as well, and they are important. One of the things that I did want to reflect on is on my visits. I have had a few visits now to our area of philosophy mouth and indeed to Faslain. When we talk to families and spouses of serving members of the forces, the big thing that they struggle with is getting local employment that matches their own career paths, because they have had to probably put it on hold or in some cases give it up completely. You cannot do the same job in Inverness, for example in London, but they are struggling with childcare. That is a devolved issue. The provision of local childcare, of course, may be a matter for the local government. When you have an influx of thousands of people in the community, it creates some problems in terms of access to health services, education and childcare. That is the crux of our amendment today. Let us look at all this in the whole and ensure that local authorities are a big part of the solution, not a big part of the problem. I think that I will close on that. We are on the right track. I am encouraged by the tone of the debate today, although I take on board the cabinet secretary's points about his difficulties with interaction with the UK Government. If he does not please come and talk to those of us in this chamber that can improve that, if we can. I think that our veterans deserve nothing less. In fact, they probably deserve a whole lot more. I, too, would like to begin my contribution by acknowledging the importance of our veterans and armed forces and note the contribution that they have made to Scotland in the wider world. I would associate myself with the comments made by Jamie Greene on the very wide understanding of what veterans are and what contribution they have made to the world. I would also wish, as other members have done, to pay my respect to those who have been injured or lost their lives in conflict, or subsequently, as a result of the impacts of the work and conflict that they have seen. Last year in this Parliament, we debated the mental health needs of veterans. At that time, I said that I believed that we should look at supporting veterans more holistically and do more to ensure that our veterans have better access to employment and health services. However, we must ensure that services are cognisant of the fact that transition from a military career creates many challenges relating to housing, employment and, of course, mental and indeed physical health. Therefore, I am glad to see the Government bringing forward a debate looking at employment, linked to housing, healthcare and multi-organisational support. Support for veterans must be co-ordinated, and it must be person-centred, as is in the motion. Only by learning from the good practice will we see adequate widespread support for our veterans. That is, in fact, the very purpose of the Scottish Labour amendment. To be clear in this motion that we should put in place national standards based on well-evidence research of needs and outcomes to ensure the best possible quality of life for those living active service. On Tuesday evening, I was honoured to attend the event that was sponsored by my colleague Paul Sweeney and other members were there. The Glasgow Helping Heroes model provides an easily accessible service, which is needs-led. Services come together around housing, finance, physical and mental health and other supports that individuals can access at the time that is right for them. The report, as we have heard mentioned, Glasgow's Helping Heroes of vital service is an important read, and I would encourage members to go online and read that report. The personal stories detailed in the report give us the reality of difficult transitions. People often feeling alone with a sense of confusion about where to turn and sun times, which I think is really important, finding themselves unable to ask for help. The research rightly recognises the importance of having co-ordinated services such as GHH, not only in supporting the individual but also the wider community, who can benefit from the existence of such a service in that area and can direct people at the time that is right for them. My view is that every veteran is owed the right support to ensure that they are able to realise the potential and live full and successful lives after service. In this chamber today, we have all demonstrated that that is what we want. However, evidence does show that, as in many walks of life, social inequality has a predetermining factor on employment prospects for military service users. Some researchers have suggested that, although high-ranking officers and soldiers are offered similar transition resources, those from the lower ranks find their opportunities underpinned by economic, social and structural inequality. That inequality has significant effects on transitional employment outcomes. We must acknowledge that to ensure that transitional needs are met in key areas such as housing, health and finance. Veterans, particularly those from poorer social economic backgrounds, need that space to develop skills and make decisions about their future employment. Speaking with ex-servicemen and women recently, it is clear that pathways to employment can be difficult and that an extra layer of advice services such as the GGH model is essential. She recognised that one of the key aspects of the Glasgow's Helping Heroes service, which is so powerful, is that it is veterans advising veterans. That lived experience is often really critical because often those who are employed and still serving in the armed forces who are advising people about to leave do not have those same insights as people have been through the process already. I thank the member for that intervention and, yes, that was very clear and it was very powerfully demonstrated in one of the short videos that was shown at the event that that ability to support each other when you are out there in civilian life is absolutely invaluable. To move on recently, I was pleased to attend a local Ayrshire British Legion group breakfast. I attended with other local Labour councillor colleagues and was grateful to members of the British Legion group for explaining to me the transition needs of those returning from active service to civilian life, particularly in a more rural area such as East Ayrshire and south of Scotland. I must say that I also found the stories from the family members very revealing and it is the work with the individual and their wider support circle that struck me as extremely important. Other MSPs, such as others, have worked alongside members of the armed forces community during campaigns and have outreached down the years. In that time, I have been struck by the deep sense of commitment and dedication they have not only to their own home but to the wider community that they live in. We need to capture that. Many of the charities and community groups that we all work with on a daily basis have people with a forces background at their heart using the skills that they have learned to better improve the place that they call home. That includes groups such as First Point Ayrshire Nan who provide first-class employment and housing support services as well as a comfortable environment for those with military backgrounds to share their experiences a very important part. If we can reflect a sense of that commitment today and help to deliver versions of the level of service that they deserve, I think that the motion and amendment can achieve that. Then we put ourselves on a path towards paying back at least some in some form our versions for the service that they have given to our country. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much, Ms Mocken. Gordon MacDonald, we follow by Maggie Chapman again a generous six minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. My constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands has three army bases within its boundary, including Dreghorn, Redford Infantry and Redford Cavalry barracks. In addition, we have Glencoaster East and to the north, the former army HQ at Craigie Hall, which is currently lying empty. I visited the barracks in my constituency on a number of occasions, with the last occasion only a couple of weeks ago, where I met Aramac trainees and apprentices providing hospitality and housekeeping services at Dreghorn barracks. Many of their employees are family members of serving army personnel, ensuring that army families have a better standard of living until the time comes that they transition into civilian life. I am no surprise that companies such as Aramac employ army family members. As a recent report by the Armed Forces Federation, military spousal partner employment found that 30 per cent of employers said that those military family members show resilience and determination and 22 per cent said that they were willing to go the extra mile in their work. It is estimated that there are 100,000 veterans of working age and their families living in Scotland. The average age of those leaving the army is 29. As a result, they will spend more of their life in civilian employment than in army life. Those are highly trained individuals who have transferable skills that are often sought after by employers, not only in Edinburgh but across Scotland. The Scottish Government's programme for government committed to securing improved opportunities for veterans and accepted the recommendations within the Scottish Veterans Commissioner's report on employment skills, learning and housing. That includes ensuring easier access to further learning and training, resulting in the Scottish Government providing additional funds to the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership to develop a skills recognition tool for use on my world of work website. That alignment of existing military skills and civilian qualifications should give veterans the best chance to compete for jobs when settling in Scotland. Improving connections to the business community by the veterans employment strategic group has resulted in membership from private sector employers for the first time. That presents an important step towards bridging the gap between public sector policy, service delivery partners and employers to the improved understanding of the benefit of employing veterans and ensuring they find suitable employment. It should also help to reach out to small and medium-sized companies as potential employers or as mentors to veterans looking to start their own business. The Forces Family Jobs website is a central portal for employment and training opportunities for military spouses and family members, which was launched in 2019. All employers who advertise in the Forces Family Jobs website have signed the Armed Forces Covenant and a profile is provided for them to explain their individual commitment to being Forces Family friendly. The Scottish Government continues to work with Forces Family Jobs to post vacancies by directing to work for Scotland, the Government's own job website. In addition, large public employers from the NHS to Police Scotland have designated websites or recruitment teams designed to support the recruitment of veterans. Many soldiers will face other challenges when they leave the service, but the biggest difficulty facing those veterans in Edinburgh before they can even start seeking employment is that of finding a home when they leave the Forces. Despite Scotland having some of the strongest homeless legislation in the world and all local authorities having a legal duty to provide support to anyone at risk of homelessness, including veterans, there are still housing issues in some parts of the country. In Edinburgh, the number of people living in the city has increased by over 13 per cent in recent years, which has put substantial pressure on housing waiting lists. During the period from 2007, the SNP Government invested £558 million in housing grant support in Edinburgh, which contributed to the completion of more than 13,000 affordable homes. Over the five years from 2021, Edinburgh will further benefit from the affordable housing supply programme investment of £234 million towards the delivery of even more good quality affordable homes, which is an increase of 32 million or 16 per cent on the previous five years. Despite that, the growth of the Edinburgh population is such that we need to make use of all suitable housing to help meet the demand. The MOD as a landlord owns hundreds of empty service family accommodation in Edinburgh and Lothians. I have been highlighting this issue over many years with all those individuals who have held the Westminster Defence Minister brief. Thankfully, the MOD have at long last agreed to sell some of those empty properties to Edinburgh Council, starting with an initial batch of 23 out of the 70A empty homes that have lain empty over many years in the Dreadcorne estate. I hope that it will not be long before the other 900 empty MOD homes across Scotland will also become available to those 600 homeless veterans and others who require a home. This will go some way in removing one of the barriers facing army personnel in their transition to civilian life and employment in Scotland. The final speaker in the open debate, after which we will move to closing speeches, and I would expect every member who has participated in the debate to be here for the start of those closing speeches with that. I call Maggie Chapman again for a generous six minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Before I begin, can I apologise to you, the Cabinet Secretary and others in the chamber for arriving late to this debate this afternoon? I mean no disrespect. I would like to thank Keith Brown for the engagement that we have had on this important motion. It matters, as others have already highlighted today, because it acknowledges some major challenges that we perhaps do not often recognise or discuss. Research has shown that working-age veterans are twice as likely as non-veterans to be unemployed and that many discover a lack, real or perceived, of transferable skills when they come to seek civilian employment. Difficulties in both mental and physical health, housing problems, as we have heard from the previous speaker and others, in adequate transition planning by the armed forces, family issues including schools and relationship breakdown, financial problems and unhelpful public attitudes can all build barriers to successful integration into civilian work. We celebrate the many ways in which the needs of veterans and their families are being recognised and addressed, including in specific work by GP practices, schools, social security Scotland and in the armed services advice project. That work, along with the partnerships outlined in the motion, will be essential to their continuing and enhanced wellbeing. Some of the challenges experienced by veterans arise directly and entirely understandably from their deployment in combat or conflict zones. Harmful levels of drinking, violent behaviour, anxiety and depression as well as PTSD are all natural and understandable responses to the horrors of war and its aftermath. The deployment of special forces means that the UK soldiers are involved in more conflict than we might imagine. But there are also aspects of military culture that, even here in the UK, in our relative peace, are deeply problematic. Bullying, racism, sexual assault and harassment must be addressed within the armed forces as assidiously as within any other workplace, in fact especially so given the lack of employment rights or union representation. Many people experience fulfilling careers within the armed forces and would recommend the life to others. But there are others for whom the promise held out by contemporary consumer-led military recruitment of adventure, social mobility, self-fulfillment and camaraderie brings bitter fruit. Those for whom military life is most damaging are overwhelmingly the very young and those who come from backgrounds of poverty and trauma, signed up to serve in the army infantry, the most dangerous of roles. In an era of recruitment shortfalls, those are the very young people who are being targeted by increasingly commercial advertising campaigns in both traditional and social media. In 2021-22, 30 per cent of new recruits to the British army were aged under 18, and more soldiers were enlisted at 16 than at any other age. The UK is the only country in Europe, the only NATO member and the only permanent member of the UN Security Council routinely to accept 16-year-old recruits. The policy has been condemned by children's commissioners in all four nations. I would like to thank the member for giving way on that point. I think that we need to be very careful when we talk about young people joining the armed services. Whilst they can join the armed services and go through the training before 18, they cannot take part in active service till 18 or bare arms. I wonder if the member would care to acknowledge that fact. Maggie Chapman, I can give you the time back. I thank Edwin Mountain for that intervention. Yes, I do acknowledge that, but some of the other issues that I've already spoken about and the surrounding impacts mean that some of these 16-year-olds are the most vulnerable and therefore most likely to have adverse experiences when they leave the army, as I'm going to come on to talk about. The policy has been condemned by children's commissioners in all four nations, by human rights and faith organisations and by veterans themselves. Those 16-year-olds are likely to experience the worst outcomes throughout their time in the army and the evidence on this is clear. Many leave before they are 18 and find themselves both out of work and out of education. Most disadvantaged young people now stay on at school or college after 16, but those who leave with a plan of joining the army rarely return to the education they left. If they remain as soldiers, it will probably be in the infantry with a higher likelihood than any other part of the army of casualty, mental or physical or of death. The younger they are, the more adverse childhood experiences they have already experienced and the earlier they leave, the more likely the experience of initial training with its intense stresses including isolation and exhaustion, its stimulation of aggression and its harsh discipline is to create or exacerbate long-term mental ill health. Those teenagers, disappointed, disillusioned, perhaps deeply damaged, who have left the army are as much veterans as the older men who fought in the Falklands or the Second World War. Their plight is often invisible, but our responsibility towards them is no less for that reason. It is a responsibility to support them in every way possible, but also to ask how we can protect other vulnerable young people from becoming early veterans. In 2018, the Parliament's Public Petitions Committee reported on armed forces visits to schools on how recruitment is not just an event but a process and made recommendations about guidance, scrutiny and data. At a time when war is in all of our thoughts and military spending and prestige are increasing, this is an issue that we might do well to revisit. Conscious of how positive campaigns such as support for girls in STEM education can be used as a wedge to normalise the presence and influence of the military. I commend the work of those who raise awareness of issues about the armed forces, especially in relation to young people, including the provision of information about their obligations and rights. I would like to put on record, as others have this afternoon, my thanks to those organisations and employers who seek to support veterans of whatever age and their families, not only into employment but with all the other aspects of living a civilian life that come fraught with difficulties and challenges to those who have experienced horrors, most of us are grateful not to have had to endure. In conclusion, members of this Parliament and the people we represent will hold a wide range of views about war, about the armed forces and the role of the military in Scotland's future, but we can share a recognition that those who have joined and left the armed forces after a long or a short period deserve our most serious care and attention. Thank you very much. Indeed, Ms Chapman, I would just have a gentle reminder to members to have their mobile devices on silent mode. We now move to the closing speeches. I close, I call, Martin Whitfield for a generous seven minutes or so. I'm very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer, and it has been both a fascinating, interesting and I would suggest very respectful debate this afternoon. A number of members have pointed out that, across the chamber, we extend our thanks to our armed services, both past and present, for what they do. We've had a fascinating insight into the often less seen work of the armed forces but also examples of veterans and third sector companies that are guiding that transition out of the armed forces and into civilian life. Scottish Labour is very clear that we require statutory targets to underpin the delivery of the armed forces covenant. Many have spoken about the covenant this afternoon, and it should be the very base of expectation that those who serve in our armed forces, be at half a day, be at many decades, should expect from the communities when they are welcomed back into them. I would also say that Scottish Labour recognised the challenges in particular that armed forces children and young people face and that their opinions should be listened to and taken seriously in all matters that affect them. I'll return to that if I may later on in my speech. I would like to highlight my colleague Paul Sweeney's opening contribution on behalf of Scottish Labour, in particularly making reference to the event that happened this week with Glasgow's Helping Heroes, also mentioned by my colleague Carol Mocken. Along with some fascinating and incredibly insightful videos and a very worthwhile report enabling our armed forces community to thrive, the phrase that caught me was that, those who were brave enough to join up need to be brave enough to push open the door and go into a supportive, holistic group of people that understand the challenges that they've faced and get a single one shop support for all that they need in Glasgow. I extend my thanks to all of those involved in that, including the forces in mind trust, who I know funded it. I think it speaks to a number of contributions this afternoon about the very great variety of veterans that we now have in our communities from those who are young and have left because the life of the armed forces was not what they expected, as Maggie Chapman has pointed out and the challenges that they face, all the way through to perhaps, as Jamie Greene emphasised, the more classic view of a veteran that people have in their mind, that all of them deserve the support both of this chamber and in Scotland for what they have done. I want to raise the point of those who suffer both physical and mental trauma as a result of their time in service and the very particular aspects and challenges that they face. I think that it's been recognised by a lot of speakers about that, particularly Graham Day, and it's always worth listening to someone with his expertise and knowledge about this subject, of which he speaks passionately, about the 2,000 individuals here in Scotland that it accounts to. Graham Day, on the subject of veterans who have been left damaged in some way and have suffered through their time in the services, would he join me in recognising that cohort of gay and transgender people who are represented now by fighting with pride? I know that the cabinet secretary is well versed on, but who, up until 1995, was the last person to be jailed merely for being homosexual in the army, as it was portrayed at the time. I wonder if he would join me in recognising that cohort and our responsibility to put right what they suffered now, insofar as we can. I'm very grateful for that intervention. Our armed forces reflect our wider society exactly as our wider society is, and the support that we extend to any minority group should also be extended to the equivalent minority group within our armed forces. I'm actually minded of the situation, not in Scotland, but that I know a significant number of veterans will be aware of following the death of Peter Brown, the veteran flight sergeant who was from the Windrush generation, who died on his own and the call has gone out to find family members and those that recall him, those that support him to attend his funeral. I think it speaks to a position that we would never want to find ourselves in, but it also speaks to a position of reality what some veterans today are facing. I would like to speak about Christine Grahame's contribution, because I found it firstly incredibly powerful. That simple statement that one size does not fit all of our veterans is so important in any aspect of interaction, the lack of proper data that we need, and also the very powerful discussion that both Christine Grahame and others, including Jamie Greene, made about the spouses and partners of our veterans and our young people. We are still incredibly short of data on our armed forces children. I thank the member for giving way on that point. Many of our veterans families are not able to be compensated and looked after by schemes that are set up by governments because they are not veterans themselves. Will the member also just take a moment to congratulate those associations within regiments and units who take specific pride in raising money for families to assist them where the government can't? Martin Whitfield, again, I can give time back. I'm very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. I have no challenge whatsoever in extending my thanks and gratitude to all organisations, to all groups. I think it speaks very much of what we've also heard today about the comradeship that is sometimes lost when people leave the armed forces that is such a strong part of our armed forces. I would like to take a short opportunity to mention Forces Children Scotland, which is an incredibly important organisation that supports veteran families and those transitions between schools that we've heard about. In that explanation that our young people have to give to their friends in school about what being an armed services child is like, the fear and concern that they have of those that are moving and having to make new circles of friends but also those who stay in one place where one parent is away on service and to make mention of the Forces Lifeboard game and comic book that Forces Children created in trying to help to explain to their friends what their experiences are like being a Forces child. For decades, this group of work to advocate and support children and young people to try and persuade our local authorities to have Forces Champions to reach out to them. The children and young people in Forces and veteran families have experiences unique from those of most of us. The anxiety of the parents away on active duty, the difficulty of relocating regularly, the challenge that that brings in their education and of course the challenge that that brings in the social support that those families need and also those who are young carers and the responsibilities that they feel are placed on their shoulders about younger siblings, brothers and sisters and the impact that that has on their future opportunities employability. In conclusion, I think that this has been a very positive debate and has been glad to have. It is one that we rightly should have regularly to keep on eye on the Scottish Government's commitments that are made, those that are both statutory, those that they rightly take on behalf of the people of Scotland. However, it is also an opportunity for those people in our armed forces, the veterans and, in the case that I make, their families and children to know that we are thinking of them, they are important and they will remain centrefold of decisions that we make here. I am grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased and delighted to be able to close this debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives and speak in support of the amendment in the name of Edward Mountain. I welcome that time has been set aside to debate how best we can support veterans as they transition into civilian life. It is right that we also acknowledge the important role that veterans' families can and do play throughout the process and how they support them with this. We owe our veterans a debt of sincere gratitude for their service to our country. I know that many across the chamber, and we have heard that today, also acknowledge that debt. As well as the gratitude that we owe the individuals, our commitment to ensure that we still do all that we can in society to support them is vitally important. Veterans are often spoken about as one group. However, the truth is that veterans come from various backgrounds, different skill sets, different talents and different needs. Of course, the common feature amongst the veterans is that they all have something to offer to society when they leave the armed forces. Around 1,800 of those who leave the armed forces each year come to live in Scotland, and it is estimated that by 2028 nearly half of veterans will be of working age. It is therefore very important that we acknowledge that so much has been done and that we can help them to transfer their skills to civilian life as effectively as possible. As the Scottish Veterans Commission has set out the aims of the veterans to transition, it is very important that we always ensure that they get the correct job rather than just any job. It is common trend amongst the veterans that individuals sometimes feel they sell themselves short when they are trying to find employment or locations when they leave. It is vitally important that we ensure that they do not sell themselves short. The support and advice that is offered to service leavers is vitally important. Careers transition partnership, Skills Development Scotland, all of those play their part, but we also have to play our part. As it stands, however, a number of veterans and their families are unaware of all the services that are available for them. That has been acknowledged by the commissioner. She has talked about that things are required to be flagged up through the services that can consider all the areas that they are entitled to and the potential careers that they may wish to go into. Those include pathways such as self-employment. Many do not see or do not think that self-employment is where they should go, but there are lots of opportunities. We have heard businesses, big businesses and small businesses, who are happy to support them, and that may give them a stepping stone to setting up their own business, and that is vitally important. It is vitally important that we approach all those possibilities to ensure that they get that added support and sometimes added financial support to ensure that that can become a reality. It is also important, as I said earlier, that social security is discussed within how systems work. We know that the benefit take-up strategy, rightly aimed at addressing some of those concerns, covers that area, but the document acknowledges that veterans are less likely as a group to access all the benefits that they are entitled to. The strategy fails to tailor-make that approach for them, and that has been acknowledged. I hope that the cabinet secretary will come and speak about that in his summing up this afternoon. It is clear that Scotland has a real role to play in all of this, and it is good to see that the UK Government has been involved with the Scottish Government in trying to work together to manage some of those things. The reviews that I have come forward show very important aspects that take place, but I would like to mention some of the contributions that we have heard this afternoon. The cabinet secretary himself talked about maximising the opportunities. That is vitally important that we maximise the opportunities for each and every service user within the process, and that nobody is forgotten about. Nobody is left behind, I think that you said, cabinet secretary, in your address. We talked about general practitioner service childcare. That is all part of the jigsaw to ensure that they have the support that they need. My colleague Edward Mountain talked about the support that armed forces individuals have and the joint strategy that is there. However, there are issues when it comes to education, childcare, GP housing and homelessness, and I echo the sentiments that the covenants should be enshrined. Those are important that we take on board. I was at his event this week in Parliament too, and I acknowledge the fantastic support that Help for Heroes is doing in the Glasgow era. That was a really good eye-opener to show us parliamentarians what is happening on the ground and how we can support. Paul Sweeney also talked about the good practice that takes place in supporting individuals that individuals from the veterans community can be worth their weight in gold to employers. That is vitally important that we give that image across that they are not individuals who are sitting back, not doing things or sitting on the street or have an issue. They are actually opportunities that people can work for and can achieve. My colleague Russell Finlay spoke about the employment issues when it comes to physical and mental veterans. We have got these issues to manage, and some do come home with trauma, but many do not come home with any of the traumas that may have been discussed this afternoon. Progress is very important about how we manage the benefits and the isolation and the physical and mental healthcare of all of these. Jamie Greene also talked about what is required when it comes to healthcare. That is vitally important, but she also spoke about, as I saw when I went up to Lossy Mouth, where individuals spoke about that families found it really difficult to find employment, to follow on a job because they had childcare issues and there was not enough support around to make that transition for them. That is important that we try and marry. I know that the cabinet secretary has spoken about it, but I have been to two or three events over the last Parliament and this Parliament when I have gone to visit forces. They have talked about that, and they continue to talk about it, so there is still a gap there that needs to be looked at. As I say, homelessness and suicide are also massive issues when it comes to how we manage and support. Throughout today's debate, we have talked about the importance of veterans within our society, about the unique skills that they bring to those individuals and they offer, and the great potential that they have to ensure that we have a flourishing labour market. We have also heard about some of the specific challenges that veterans still face in the transition of living life. Martin Whitfield spoke about the comic and the board game. I have had the privilege of being actively involved in that process from its conception when we had youngsters who came and spoke and then we went to the university and the university art class decided to design that process. I hope that later on in this year we will have the opportunity here to launch that. It did not happen because of a delay within ourselves in this building one night when youngsters could not come, but I am sure that that will take place in the future. It is clear without question today that there has been a lot of consensus around what is taking place in this chamber, and we all want to support as many individuals as we can when it comes to the transition. Veterans can enjoy a productive life, and they deserve that because of the contribution that they have given and the sacrifices that they have paid. We owe it to them to ensure that they get a best start when they leave and join the society that we all enjoy. Mr Stewart, I now call on Keith Brown to wind up the debate. Cabinet Secretary, I would be grateful if you could take us up to just before decision time. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Just to agree with the last point that was made, I think that there has been a very good debate. There has been a substantial degree of consensus, although that was not actually my intention. I agree with the debate. If you remember, it was not because anybody asked me to do it, but if you remember the last veterans debate that we had, I said that it would be good to have another opportunity out with remembrance. When people do feel constrained about criticism or challenge they want to make, that was the purpose behind it. Maybe in future we will get even more challenge. In future, hopefully, all sides of this chamber will have more attendance at these events, which are about discussing the future of veterans and perhaps we can attract more people to the public galleries and make sure that those debates are worthy of that. I think that the nature of the subject, the future of our veterans, merits more interest. It has been generally consensual and I am afraid that I have to try and reluctantly break that to the extent that I cannot accept the Labour amendment. If you were to look at the implications, and I have been to Glasgow's Helping Heroes a number of times, I think that it is a fantastic organisation. There are many others as well across the country, but the nature of the work that is done by these and other organisations is either through local authorities or it is through the third sector or voluntary or charitable bodies. The idea of the Scottish Government could insist on taking across the whole country all of where we think there are examples of good practice and putting in a framework or statutory framework, which has been suggested, is not practicable. A great deal of sympathy with the aims behind this and, as I say, everything that I could say about the Glasgow Helping Heroes project would be positive in the times that I visited them in the past, but many other projects across the country. We do rely on, in relation to this, around about 400 charities in Scotland concerned with veterans. We do rely on local authorities and others to do this. I will also say if I can to try to soften that blow, if it is a blow, to say that some of the contributions that I think we heard from Labour benches, in particular Carol Mocken, raised the issue that is very rarely raised in these debates about social inequality. If you think about the recruitment grounds for especially infantry, for especially the army, those have been very often in areas of multiple deprivation. I joined the armed forces from an area of multiple deprivation. What I would say, though, is that in the 10 years or now 13 years that span the period when I have been doing this job at various points. At the very start I heard an attitude which was, that's how we found them, we have no responsibility to help them in future. They were happy to say that senior people in the MOD and the armed forces, that's how we find these people and that's how we leave them. We don't have a responsibility and I think that that attitude has changed. I think that there is an acknowledgement now, the fact that there is an obligation. If you take somebody at that age in life and they are then trained in the way they are, they do the things that they do, they make the sacrifices which Alexander Stewart, then society does have a responsibility. Does the armed forces provide education on other opportunities? Yes, I'll take the intervention. I thank the minister for his words on that point. It's an important point, as you know, close to my heart about inequalities in society. In terms of supporting the Labour amendment, if you would consider some sort of statement of intent, we're not asking you to specifically do those things. We're just asking to have some kind of national standard that organisations out there doing work could work too, if you would consider that. What I would say to Carol Mawkin is that there's been some confusion around this, so I've heard from Labour members the intention, in fact, from yourself, to have a statutory framework, statutory standards. I am a bit unclear as to what's proposed, as to whether that's something that you think that the Scottish Parliament should agree, or whether it's something that's going to be imposed or brought in by a potential future UK Government. I know that the Conservatives, for example, say that they want to bring forward a bill. I'm happy to look at that bill when it's brought forward. I'm happy to look at any proposals that the Labour Party has in relation to that as well, but it's not yet clear to me exactly what's intended and how you intend to go beyond the covenant provisions, which are obviously enshrined in law, only as far as saying that statutory services have got to take into account the interests of veterans. I'm not sure exactly what's proposed, but perhaps we can find out just now from Paul Sweeney. I thank the minister for giving way. It is disappointing that the Government has minded not to support the amendment. I can perhaps offer some reassurance to the minister, though, that we're not proposing that this is put as a sort of universal statutory straightjacket on Government to dictate how local services should be designed. What it is about is advertising or creating national exemplars that can offer inspiration to local authorities when designing services that are appropriate to their area. Perhaps in that spirit you might consider supporting the amendment even at this late stage. Unfortunately, I do have to consider the amendments on the order paper in front of me. What I would say, in trying to respond to the point that Paul Sweeney and Carol Mawkin have made, is that we currently do that through, for example, the veterans fund. We'll try and make sure that we contribute to areas of good practice. I'm willing to continue that discussion about how we can go forward in that area. I think that it's well intentioned. I just think that the practical implications are perhaps not the ones that were sought when the amendment was drawn up and for that reason can't support it. I can support the Conservative motion and I've said that I would do that. I would just try and say a couple of points about the discussion that we've had about the relationship between the UK Government and the Scottish Government in relation to this. I would exempt from anything about Annabel Goldie, who has always been keen to work together collegiately. Although, to exemplify the point about to make, the last time I asked to meet with her, went to meet with her in London, the door of the MWD was essentially shut in my face. He wouldn't even recognise the ID card that I had. He had no knowledge of the meeting. That is an example of the attitude that I've had from the Secretary of State, who has continuously refused to meet me, unlike previous Secretary of State. We've had one meeting of the ministerial veterans group over the last two years. In relation to the recent innovation of the Scottish Government to pay for the medals, the cost of the medals of veterans who have legitimately lost or had them stolen, again I was assured of a response. I've had no response. I take at face value Jamie Greene's offer and any other Conservatives often to say that this attitude could change for the reasons that many Conservatives have said. If we work together on these things we can achieve more, that has not been my experience. Another example of that would be the LIBOR funding, because much has been said about some of the very good initiatives by the UK Government. The UK Government, through the LIBOR funding, overnight and the Scottish Government, with no dedicated resources coming to it from the UK Government for veterans funding, has had to find funding to backfill some of the, for example, Age Scotland recently, which was previously funded by the LIBOR funding. There is scope for it and a lot greater work. There is more that we can achieve together. To Maggie Chapman, I am very appreciative of the remarks that she made initially and the fact of the relationship that we have had working on those and justice issues, which has been very productive and respectful until today, when she referred to the old men that Serven the Falcons were. That is the relationship between her and I. It is over after that. I think that there has been some very good contributions made. I think that I would hope that, in time, whoever is responding for the Government in relation to these things that we can build on today, because it has been a bit tentative, if we are honest. People have tried to be consensual, which is good, but there are challenges to be made to the Government. There are challenges to be made elsewhere. The more that we can do that, the more we can improve the service that we all provide to veterans. I will try to respond to the point that was raised by Christine Grahame, which was very much about spouses and families of serving personnel and the point that we both made about how that is crucial to the morale of serving personnel. She asked the question about what we do for them when transition happens. I think that the point that I was trying to make in my initial remarks was that we should be doing it long before transition happens. If we can make sure that spouses of serving personnel, nurses, teachers, doctors, if they are properly employed during the time that their spouse or partner is in service, then that transition becomes much easier. We have to tackle it at the earliest possible stage. Like others, I think that there has been—certainly, I will give a way to Martin Whitfield. I am very grateful to Keith Brown giving way. Could he comment about the paucity of data with regard to forces children and also possibly comment on the census publication with regard to the question contained? I would say that I was very interested in the point that was made. My constituency is the only one in Scotland with a school dedicated to the children of armed forces personnel, so I am very close to this issue with the Queen Victoria school in Dumblane. Paul Sweeney asked the question in his initial remarks in 2024 and next year is for my love of data from the census. In the meantime, we have worked with the UK Government on the survey that asks the questions, some of which were related to children, more generally about people's experience in the armed forces, and we have still to work through the kind of treasure trove of information that that will provide. He raised an important point. Just to underline the point that he made, I am well aware of the time that I have been doing this job of one unit that was moved from Germany to Edinburgh to Northern Ireland within 18 months. The children had to move to three different educational systems, and that is not good for anybody. The point was made by Maggie Chapman about the way that she treats people in the armed forces, especially given the fact that they have families. I think that there has been a great deal of valuable contributions in the debate. I hope that this will be the first of future debates that we have in relation to veterans and how they can best be ensured of our support. In this case, we are talking about employability. The same would be true in terms of homelessness and the same would be true in terms of their health. I am not making a point against anybody, but there is a temptation—there has been for many years—to try to portray veterans. Again, I use that horrendous phrase as being mad, bad and sad. That has so far removed the vast majority of veterans who do manage to come straight back into society, are productive. We have all said on all sides of the chamber how much they can offer employers, how much they can offer society. It does not reflect them. They are not overrepresented in terms of homelessness. They are not overrepresented in terms of mental health issues. They are not overrepresented in terms of the prison population, although there are some very interesting and challenging aspects to the veteran prison population in Scotland, which forces in mind to be mentioned, will look at, especially in relation to sexual offending. However, the vast majority of veterans come back into society and play a very productive role. Our challenge collectively is to ensure that that role is commensured out with what they have done. As I said at the start, if you come out as a colour sergeant having spent 30 years now on forces with all that experience, all that training and then you are asked to feel grateful because you get a job that is way below that level of experience, then that is not doing right by veterans. We have to do better by veterans. I am keen to continue working with the UK Government. I am grateful for the offer of Jamie Greene to see what we can do to improve relations there. I will conclude by saying that we published a refreshed veteran strategy action plan where we made several commitments under the employment education and skills theme. As I have said to members, we will follow that through. However, it is right that we are challenged in future and I would hope that whoever is responsible for this area in terms of the Government that we continue to do that and let's have more debates and let's have more people coming to the debates from all parties in this house because there was not enough people here to hear some of the very good speeches that were made. Thank you very much. That concludes the debate on employment support for veterans and their families. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that amendment 8332.1, in the name of Edward Mountain, which seeks to amend motion 8332, in the name of Keith Brown, on employment support for veterans and their families be agreed. Are we all agreed? The next question is that amendment 8332.2, in the name of Paul Sweeney, which seeks to amend motion 8332, in the name of Keith Brown, on employment support for veterans and their families be agreed. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed, therefore we will move to a vote and there will be a short suspension to allow access to digital voting.