Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, it was very clear—and it was powerfully demonstrated in one of the short videos that were shown at the event that I attended—that people’s ability to support one another once they are out in civilian life is invaluable.

I was pleased to attend a local Ayrshire British Legion group breakfast recently. I attended with local Labour councillor colleagues, and I was grateful to members of the British Legion group for explaining to me the transition needs of those returning from active service to civilian life, particularly in a more rural area such as East Ayrshire and South Scotland. I found the stories from family members very revealing, and the work with the individual and their wider support circle struck me as extremely important.

Like other MSPs, I have worked alongside members of our armed forces community during campaigns and outreach down the years. In that time, I have been struck by the deep sense of commitment and dedication that they have, not only to their own home but to the wider community that they live in. We need to capture that.

Many of the charities and community groups that we all work with on a daily basis have people with a forces background at their heart, using the skills that they have learned to better improve the place that they call home. That includes groups such as Veterans First Point Ayrshire and Arran, which provides first-class employment and housing support services, as well as a comfortable environment where those with military backgrounds can share their experiences, which is a very important aspect.

If we can reflect a sense of that commitment today and help to deliver veterans the level of service that they deserve—and I think that the motion and our amendment can achieve that—we will put ourselves on a path towards paying our veterans back, at least in some form, for the service that they have given to our country.

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

I, too, acknowledge the importance of our veterans and armed forces and note their contribution to Scotland and the wider world. I associate myself with Jamie Greene’s comments on the wide understanding of what veterans are and the extent of their contribution to the world. As other members have done, I pay my respects to veterans who have been injured or who have lost their lives in conflict or subsequently as a result of the impacts of their work.

Last year, we debated the mental health needs of veterans. At that time, I said that we should look at supporting our veterans more holistically and do more to ensure that they have better access to employment and health services. However, we must also ensure that services are cognisant of the fact that transition from a military career creates many challenges in housing, employment and mental and physical health. Therefore I am glad to see the Government securing a debate on veterans’ employment linked to housing, healthcare and multi-organisational support. As the motion suggests, such support for veterans must be co-ordinated and person centred. Only by learning from good practice will we see adequate, widespread support for our veterans. The purpose of Scottish Labour’s amendment is to clarify that we should put in place national standards based on well-evidenced research of veterans’ needs and outcomes to ensure the best possible quality of life for those leaving active service.

On Tuesday evening, I was honoured to attend an event that was sponsored by my colleague Paul Sweeney, which other members also attended. The Glasgow’s helping heroes model provides an easily accessible, needs-led service. Services come together around housing, finance, physical and mental health, and other forms of support that individuals can access at a time that is right for them. As we have heard, the report entitled “GHH: A Vital Service—Enabling our Armed Forces community to thrive” makes important reading, and I encourage members to find it online. The personal stories that are detailed in the report show us the reality of difficult transitions in which people often feel alone, with a sense of confusion about where to turn, and sometimes find themselves unable to ask for help. The research rightly recognised the importance of having co-ordinated services such as GHH in supporting not only individuals but members of the wider community, who can benefit from the existence of such services in their area and can direct people at the time that is right for them.

Every veteran is owed the right support to ensure that they are able to realise their potential and live full and successful lives after service. All members who have contributed to the debate have demonstrated that that is what we want. However, evidence shows that, as happens in many walks of life, social inequality is a predetermining factor in the employment prospects of ex-military service people. Some researchers have suggested that, although high-ranking officers and soldiers are offered similar transition resources, those from the lower ranks find that their opportunities are underpinned by economic, social and structural inequality that has significant effects on transitional employment outcomes.

We must acknowledge that, to ensure that transitional needs are met in key areas such as housing, health and finance, veterans—particularly those from poorer social economic backgrounds—need space to develop their skills and make decisions about their future employment. It is clear to me from having spoken with ex-servicemen and women recently that pathways to employment can be difficult and that it is essential to have an extra layer of advice services, such as under the GHH model.

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to increasing the income threshold for free school meal eligibility for families not currently covered by any free school meal entitlement. (S6O-02051)

We know from the last update that just over two thirds of those eligible for free school meals took them up. We also know that the Scottish Government has control over eligibility thresholds and could increase that further.

Free school meals are a flagship policy of this Government, but a third of those who are eligible are not using them, while children from low-income families are still going hungry during the school day, with Aberlour reporting that thousands of ineligible families have now accrued school meal debt.

Will the cabinet secretary therefore consider increasing the eligibility threshold beyond the already promised extension to P6 and P7 in order to tackle hunger and support low-income families in the South Scotland region and beyond?

I agree that we should keep the petition open. It is well thought through and put together, and it is evidence based. The convener mentioned the Scottish crime recording board, and we should pursue the matter with it to see what information it records and how it will take things forward. Along with hearing from the petitioners, which would be immensely helpful, it would be worth while to make a formal approach to the Scottish crime recording board.

This area—the support that is available to students—is really important right across the board. We are trying to attract people into these important jobs, particularly in the public sector. Having met social work students and the social work organisations, I can say that they are at crisis point. People believe them to be good career options, but it is incredibly difficult to finance yourself through that process.

When speaking to social work students, I noted, in particular, that, at that late stage when they are heavily invested in their placement, other people in academic life may be able to get a balance by doing some work to support themselves financially. Are we really asking social work students doing a nine-month placement in the workplace, as they must do, to also take on additional work? That should not be the case if we want them to have the ability to do that well and to get the qualification and experience. It is such an important area: people need to have good experiences as they learn the ropes and go through their career. We need them to be available to our public sector.

I absolutely support keeping the petition open as we seek guidance from social work organisations such as the social work unions and the SSSC on what we could do to help the petitioners with this.

I have friends who have children of the age when this is perhaps happening. It is a serious issue, because those young people have said to me that, when they go out, they make preparations with one another to make sure that drinks are not being spiked. If young people are looking out for one another, and raising the issue as a concern among themselves in those groups, it must be taken to be a serious issue by the police.

I would be interested in getting some feedback from the police, as Fergus Ewing indicated, but also some feedback on how seriously they take the issue and whether they have training for police officers in that area.

I, too, read the briefing thoroughly. It is an important and sensitive issue. The Government has indicated that it has no intent to change the law on abortion. I believe that the right to choose and to get appropriate healthcare throughout pregnancy is important for women. In this instance, therefore, I do not believe that the petition should go forward. That is my balanced view.

Good morning. I start by saying that I have spoken to the minister and that we are broadly supportive of the bill. I thank the minister and his team for the discussions that we have had. I know that the direction that we want to go in is about getting this right for people. It is much appreciated. As I go through, I hope that what I say shows that I have listened to the discussions with the minister and with the sector, particularly around consumer protection.

In moving amendment 47, I seek to make clear that the possibility of a waiver of defence based on an agreement between assignor and debtor is removed. Amendment 48 is simply consequential on amendment 47, as there would be no agreement to prevent or restrict. As I said, I am grateful to the minister for considering such amendments. If he can set out clearly how the Government can provide assurances to small businesses and others that waiver of defence is protected, I would not be inclined to press those amendments.

In lodging amendment 49, I have similar intentions to those behind amendment 47. It is my hope that we will provide the maximum level of support to sole traders and individual consumers. I therefore again look to the minister to highlight in his remarks how he will ensure that the bill will offer the protections that the amendment would otherwise provide.

The aforementioned points also remain applicable to my lodging of amendment 50.

I discussed amendment 51 with the minister. I consider it appropriate that there are adequate and sound reporting mechanisms in place to ensure that the impact of the waiver of defence clause is given consideration and that steps are in place to ensure that MSPs can question Government about the impact of that clause should any negative impacts be identified and require mitigation. It may be worth the minister confirming whether he is content that Parliament can request a review at any time and whether he can say with a strong degree of certainty that such calls for a review would be accepted, if challenges were to arise.

It is my view that having reporting expectations set out in the bill would remove challenges that we may face further down the line if ministers find themselves unwilling to review legislation that is having unintended negative consequences.

I move amendment 47.