Hansard

Thank you, Presiding Officer—your generosity is always appreciated. I am also delighted to participate in the debate, as an MSP whose region has a long and rich history with our armed forces, both current and past.

I lament the absence of my colleague Edward Mountain from today’s debate—we all wish him well. It is a privilege to open the debate on his behalf, and I will try to cover some of the points that I think he would have wanted to make.

I say at the outset that, whatever our personal or political views on the many global conflicts that are occurring, I hope that we all agree about the courage and dedication of the members of our armed forces—those who are currently serving and our veterans. The motion recognises the sacrifice that is made for us and our country, as well as the contribution that our veterans continue to make in today’s society.

The motion rightly calls on the Scottish Government to work with stakeholders to improve the lives of veterans, and so it should. That includes the more than 50 veterans organisations that actively work in Scotland, many of which are in my region and many of which are under the umbrella of Veterans Scotland. There are too many for me to mention them all, but I commend in particular the work of Erskine, Poppyscotland, the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association, Veterans UK, Haig Housing Trust and Help for Heroes. There are too many others to mention, and I apologise to those that I have missed.

We have chosen, as is normal practice in such debates, not to amend the Government’s motion today, but we will raise some of the important points that came out of the Scottish veterans commissioner’s report.

Last March, I spoke in a Government debate on employment support for veterans. Members might recall that debate. I highlighted the story of a veteran of world war two, from Greenock, who came back a hero from battle and then went on to run a very successful local business until his sad death in 2002. He was a fine example of adapting and adjusting back into the local community.

In that debate 18 months ago, I reminded the Government of the very stark statistics. Back in 2021-22, an estimated 640 veterans were assessed as being homeless or as being threatened with homelessness. Today, the number is estimated to be more than 780: it is heading in the wrong direction. In fact, right across the UK, it is estimated that there are at least 2,000 homeless veterans. That is shocking by any measure. The minister talked about progress having been made, which is welcome, but in my view, it is shockingly poor that we see those statistics going in the wrong direction. My view is that the Government must accept some responsibility for that—that view is vindicated by the report.

We know that there are more than 175,000 veterans living in Scotland, but it is important to point out that there is no such thing as a typical veteran. Only half of them are over 65 years of age. There are around 7,000 of them in the Moray region—which I am sure we will hear a lot more about—17,000 in Fife and more than 10,000 in Glasgow and the West Scotland region that I live in. The majority of those veterans are male, of course, but more than 20,000 are female, and 43 per cent report having a disability or long-term health condition, and therefore a very specific set of needs.

However, that is where statistics end. It is good to see changes to the census data, but I do not know from it how many veterans are registered with their local general practitioner, how many are in meaningful employment and how many are engaged with addiction or mental health support services—or, indeed, how many are not.

Those three areas are relevant to veterans. I note from yesterday’s budget announcements that the budget line for drug and alcohol policy is being increased by just £500,000 year on year, after a £13 million cut the previous year. I do not mention that to make any political points, but to say that renewed focus on mental health services and support for our veterans with addiction problems is hugely important.

We cannot forget that housing, health, skills, employability and addiction services are all devolved areas—they are focuses of the Scottish Government and Parliament. I know that data exists out there, but until we can see a bigger picture of what the veteran community looks like, I do not think that services can fully develop policies to support it.

As members would expect, I will, of course, plug our proposed armed forces and veterans bill, which would enshrine in law the armed forces covenant for devolved bodies—a covenant behind which I hope we can all unite.

I also associate myself with the comments by the minister on Lord Etherton’s work in his independent review into the historical treatment of LGBT veterans, many of whom reside in or came from Scotland. Next week, the UK Parliament will hold a debate on the review, and I am sure that the veterans community will be watching with great interest. There are too many people to mention and thank in relation to that.

While we are on the subject of Westminster, I note that many veterans have contacted me ahead of today’s debate and expressed concerns about the new Labour UK Government’s approach to the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, after the statement that was made in the House of Commons on that legislation. I hope that it will wish to reflect on those concerns.

I will conclude on a note of unity. The Parliament’s steadfast support for our armed forces and veterans is not a partisan issue and should never be up for debate. It is our responsibility to support the people who protect us. They pay the ultimate price with their physical and mental health, and too many of them are still hidden from the eyes of policy makers, lawmakers and service providers.

It is all very well for us to talk from the chamber and its wood-lined panels—a luxury that our veterans never had when they went to fight on our behalf. We owe them. Although I support the motion in the Government’s name, I do so while expecting much more progress to have been made when we meet again to discuss next year’s report.