Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)

Meeting date: Wednesday, June 8, 2022

Official Report 1063KB pdf

---

Falklands War

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-03916, in the name of Graeme Dey, on commemorating 40 years since the Falklands war. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I encourage members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible, or to place an R in the chat function. I call on Stuart McMillan to open the debate on behalf of Graeme Dey.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament marks the 40th anniversary of the Falklands War, which began on 2 April 1982 and lasted 74 days until the Argentine surrender on 14 June; remembers the 255 UK Armed Forces personnel who died and were among over 1,000 lives lost in the conflict; commemorates the service and sacrifice of all those involved, with 30,000 sailors, marines, soldiers, airmen and merchant mariners having taken part, and with many more civilians having supported the war effort; recognises the particular role of Arbroath-based 45 Commando and the 2nd Battalion of the Scots Guards, which between them lost 15 men to the fighting; appreciates the efforts of poppyscotland and Legion Scotland to mark the occasion, including a service of remembrance to be held in Edinburgh on 18 June 2022, and commends the work of both organisations in supporting the veterans of this conflict and their families, many of whom continue to be affected by the tragedy of war to this day.

17:39  

I am delivering this speech on behalf of my colleague Graeme Dey MSP, who is ill. I am privileged to have been asked to do so, and I imagine that my role in the Scottish Parliament branch and executive committee of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association might have been a factor in that. In 2013, I visited the Falkland Islands on behalf of the Scottish Parliament to take part in a conference on the issue of self-determination for the islands, which is an issue that Graeme Dey’s speech touches on. From this point on, this speech is from Graeme Dey.

Any commemoration demands careful reflection on an event’s impacts and legacies, and one marking a 40th anniversary requires a particular focus. Many, if not most of us, in the chamber will have some recollection of the Falklands conflict, and I am grateful to colleagues who supported the motion and those who are contributing this evening. However, a recent survey by Help for Heroes found that almost half of 18 to 34-year-olds do not know when the Falklands war happened; indeed, more than a quarter of them had not even heard of it. Based on the age profile, that is perhaps not surprising, but it is important that we do not allow that conflict to join the Korean war in being felt by many of those who served in it as a forgotten war.

Veterans and their sacrifice cannot be forgotten. It is crucial that we remember those who lost their lives and those who were left mentally and physically scarred by events 40 years ago. When we reflect on past conflicts, it can be easy to get caught up in dates, overall narratives and accounts of decision making of political leaders. One of Mr Dey’s abiding personal memories, as a young journalist at the time, was of an infamous tabloid newspaper front page reporting the sinking of the Belgrano. That very much returned to the forefront of his mind when watching a recent documentary on the war and hearing a British naval veteran speak of his mixed emotions on hearing of that event. The euphoria over a significant win for his side in the conflict was immediately tempered by recognition that many fellow mariners had perished.

In reflecting on what unfolded in the south Atlantic, it is essential that we focus on those individual stories and sacrifices on the front line. The first front line, in the Falklands, consisted of 32 local defence force volunteers and the navy personnel there at the point of invasion, none of whom had gone there expecting to see action. At just 67 men, the marine contingent, which was known as naval party 8901, showed a bravery and resistance that went unrecognised for too long.

In a recent documentary, Major Mike Norman, who led those men in a vastly underresourced defence against an 800-strong landing party, described how certain of death he was. Many tabloid headlines at the time painted Norman and his men as cowards, but their efforts, which have now been acknowledged, quash any such claim. During the several hours of fighting, around 6,500 rounds of ammunition were discharged, casualties were inflicted and arms were eventually laid down only on the orders of the British governor. After being sent home, most of the marines immediately volunteered to head back and ended up there as part of the forces who recaptured the islands.

The 45 Commando unit, which is based in Arbroath, in Mr Dey’s constituency, played a significant role in the Falklands, being among the very first troops to depart, with Cabinet Secretary Keith Brown among them. The 45 were to become known as the yompers, due to the extreme miles that they had to march, or yomp, in grim conditions on those small islands, 8,000 miles from home. They followed a 110-mile route with constant diversions and detours, during which everything that they had was carried on their backs.

James Kelly, a young second lieutenant talked of going for 44 days without fresh water and a change of clothing and being freezing cold and soaking wet, with wind chill temperatures well below zero. The marines saw ships being hit and sunk, and friends and colleagues injured. That must have been unimaginably hard on all involved, but there were to be tough, heart-breaking experiences for those back home, too. Theresa Davidson was just 25 when she lost her husband, Clark Mitchell of the Scots Guards, on the final day of the Falklands conflict. He was one of eight Scots Guards to lose their lives that day. All of that is a reminder that there is nothing—nothing—glorious about war.

Apart from the liberation of the islands and the sending of a clear message that the right to self-determination is to be cherished and protected, the Falklands war proved important in another way, in that it led to a re-evaluation of previous perceptions of trauma. It was to become recognised that, even the after-effects of a short-term war had the power to linger for much longer than desired. The unpredictable nature of trauma can be brought on by grief, survivors’ guilt or simply the inability to cope with the reality of life after war. As a result, too many Falklands veterans have been led on to paths of alcoholism, drug abuse, homelessness, family breakdown and crime.

When we read the stories of Falklands veterans, the main takeaway is that, for most, not a day goes by without a memory or thought of the conflict. Individual decisions that were made during the war can still play on their minds, with the only solution being to live with them and their consequences, good or bad. Post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, was not recognised until 1987. Before then, during the second world war, it was known as shellshock and, during the great war, it was viewed as cowardice.

There remains progress to be made. Many people who have served in the armed forces fear that, by disclosing a suspected mental health issue, they are disclosing a weakness that may affect their future careers. That is why I express my continued appreciation for the military charities and associations that provide the necessary support and friendship to manage the powerful emotions that are experienced daily by our veterans.

For many Falklands servicemen, the effects of PTSD have taken years and sometimes decades to manifest. Before PTSD received recognition, veterans were shunned and unsupported, to the point where the act of seeking help seemed out of the question. Take the example of the youngest Scot who was deployed in the Falklands, David Cruickshanks, who was aged 17 and for whom joining the navy was a dream come true. It was not until 1999—17 years after the Falklands war—that his struggle with PTSD and depression was picked up by a doctor in an unrelated consultation. Only then did he start to speak about his personal struggles.

Last November, Mr Dey was fortunate to revisit RM Condor’s woodlands garden of remembrance, which is a poignant memorial to the men who have lost their lives in various conflicts, including the Falklands. The garden’s tranquil environment offers a focal point for the men of 45 Commando and their relatives to reflect and remember. One cannot visit it and fail to be moved. It is a matter of record that 255 British servicemen lost their lives in the Falklands as well as, lest we forget, 649 Argentinians. According to Royal British Legion figures, approximately 350 British Falklands veterans have taken their own lives since the conflict.

Although it can be said that, in the decades since the Falklands war, there has been more cultural awareness of the seriousness of PTSD, many people still struggle with the issue. The expectation during the Falklands conflict was to get on with it and deal with it, whatever “it” actually was. There can no longer be a stigma around asking for help, which is an act that is so simple yet, in some cases, is life changing.

To conclude my contribution to the debate I want to quote Ian Gardiner, then commander of X-Ray company, 45 Commando, as he reflected on the war:

“We are all of us changed men. For many, it was the pivotal event in their lives. The time before was innocence, while afterwards was a particular form of adulthood that not many ever see.”

In recognition of those words, this anniversary must serve as a reminder of the need and our collective responsibility to support our veterans whose service exacted a toll, because they bear their physical and mental wounds every single day, not just during anniversaries of the conflicts in which they saw action.

Thank you, Mr McMillan, and thank you for stepping into the breach at short notice.

17:48  

It is a pleasure to contribute a few thoughts to the debate, 40 years since the UK’s victory in Port Stanley and the end of the Falklands war. I thank Graeme Dey for lodging the motion and wish him well, and I thank Stuart McMillan for introducing it and associate myself with everything that he had to say. I am delighted that the Scottish Parliament is taking time to commemorate again those who were lost in the war and the fight to ensure that the Falkland Islands are British, free and able to choose their future. I acknowledge and welcome Mr Brown’s repeat performance this afternoon and, of course, his service to the Falklands in that conflict.

Over the course of a 74-day war, 250 British troops were killed, along with three islanders. Debates such as this and that of my colleague Sharon Dowey at the end of last month give us the opportunity to remember those who gave their lives to protect the freedom of Falkland Islanders. It is also a further opportunity to thank veterans for their service.

As a result of that military campaign to protect the islands and their people, Falkland Islanders have had their right to self-determination upheld and guaranteed under the continuing protection of British Forces South Atlantic Islands, headquartered at RAF Mount Pleasant. The islanders’ gratitude for the United Kingdom’s intervention and continuing support is clear. They remain proud to be British, deeply affectionate and appreciative of the efforts of the UK during those dark weeks and months and for the heroism and discipline of our military personnel.

I see that the lights have dimmed, Presiding Officer—sunglasses are now no longer required.

At an event in Parliament at the end of last month to commemorate the 40 years since the conflict, we heard from the representative of the Falkland Islands to the UK, Richard Hyslop, who spoke of the nation’s progression from wool production and sheep rearing to tourism, fishing and the oil and gas industries. Since the war, there has been an estimated doubling of the population of the islands.

Although the victory signalled change for the islands, huge consequences were also felt in defeated Argentina, as a result of the humiliating failure for the Argentine junta. Our victory at that time was pivotal in ridding Argentina of military junta rule and bringing more democracy to that nation.

The conflict was the UK’s first large-scale military engagement following the debacle of Suez in 1956. Our military was still lacking in confidence and standing wounded on the world stage. More widely, the US was suffering following the debacle of the Iranian hostage crisis rescue mission and the longer-term trauma of Vietnam. The west was no longer as confident or, in the eyes of many, as effective as the powerhouse that they had come to expect. The Falklands conflict reignited our resolve, because it was a situation in which talk was clearly no longer enough and action had to be taken. To paraphrase Churchill, doing one’s best was not enough; we had to do what was required.

In the days that followed the invasion of the Falklands, there was a united front across the country and, basically, across the globe in respect of the UK’s military involvement. Most members of the European Community at the time came out against Argentina’s aggression, along with Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Many other countries stood in support, and some took their own action by implementing sanctions. There was a united effort to ensure that the invasion did not become a precedent and that we could defend the right of Falkland Islanders to live their lives in their way. At the time, we did not know that we could secure that, but we managed to do so.

On Tuesday, we officially reach 40 years since the end of the war. At that time, I was in my early 20s, and I was not fighting, but I remember the daily BBC reports and I am acutely aware that, because of the passage of time, many members of the Parliament today do not have any first-hand recollection of the event. However, we cannot allow the sacrifice to be forgotten.

One key issue is that, in the 40 years since, the Falklands war has remained unique, in that it was the last war to predate 24-hour rolling news. At the time, that allowed the news flow to be limited and controlled by the UK Government and military, as well as being inevitably limited by the remoteness of the islands. That contrasts with the on-going war in Ukraine, where journalists are embedded in the major conflict zones and are reporting live at every stage. Public opinion was therefore far more managed with the Falklands war, which is perhaps best illustrated by the famous words that Brian Hanrahan used to avoid the military censors when he said:

“I counted them all out and I counted them all back.”

The existence of in-depth and committed coverage changed that. Never again will a western Government send troops to a country while controlling the narrative and limiting the media, which is only right. Military campaigns are now widely reported, with the media able to promote images and sometimes uncomfortable truths, which influence the public’s perception. That now performs a significant role in how any military conflict must be planned and managed.

The Falklands war was the antithesis of that. We saw with the Americans in Vietnam how the contrary situation can fundamentally change the public’s support for a war. There is now a fine line for Governments to tread. The level of engagement by the media is, I think, a healthy outcome of modern conflict.

At the time of the Falklands war, I remember Mrs Thatcher addressing the Conservative conference in Scotland. Nobody thought that she would come, but she did, because there was a major event taking place in the Falklands and it was important for continuity to be seen to be happening here at home. I have always admired that statecraft, which is something that is gained and is a trait that is both learned and shared, irrespective of party. As the Falklands were invaded, Harold Macmillan visited Mrs Thatcher to pass on his advice and counsel, while Mrs Thatcher did the same for Tony Blair at the commencement of the second Gulf war.

As we approach 40 years since the victory in the Falklands, we should acknowledge the wider influence that it had on the way that military conflicts were subsequently conducted. As a nation, we should remain proud of our efforts in 1982 and our commitment to the Falkland Islands. That should never falter, and we should acknowledge the progress that the islands have made since then with British support.

Thank you, Mr Carlaw. I gave you a bit more time, as you took the return to mood lighting in your stride.

17:55  

I thank Graeme Dey for lodging his motion. Last month, we had an excellent debate that was prompted by Sharon Dowey, but the debate today gives us just a little more time to reflect on the impact of the conflict on people, not just as numbers or statistics.

For many people, the impact of war and serving on the front line stays with them throughout their lives. It is not necessarily something that they want to talk about because of its impact on their lives, on their mental and physical health and on their families. While we celebrate this 40th anniversary, we also need to remember that it is an incredibly painful anniversary for many people who lost a family member. The impact of the war lives with them today.

I want to reflect on the impact on veterans and how we support them, but I also want to reflect on the lives of the people who live on the Falkland Islands and on how we can retain and develop our links with them. It was striking to see from poppyscotland in its briefing that even now, 40 years on, veterans are coming forward for the first time to seek support; 40 years seems to be a long time to wait to ask, but it is critical that we support them.

As Graeme Dey said, the knowledge that we have of the impact on veterans’ lives is not new. Between 1916 and 1919 injured soldiers were treated in military psychiatric hospitals for post-traumatic stress disorder, as we would call it now, but then it was called shellshock. Recent estimates show that up to 325,000 British soldiers might have suffered from shellshock from the first world war. For too long there was stigma for the people who had to live with the aftermath of their service. Results of a 2018 research project from King’s College London estimated the rate of PTSD among United Kingdom veterans of all conflicts to be 7.4 per cent. The rate of PTSD among the public is 4 per cent. That is something to reflect on. The evidence showed that the rate was even higher for veterans who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan: for veterans who had been deployed to those conflicts the rate of PTSD was 9 per cent, and for those who had been deployed to war zones in combat roles the rate was even higher. Its was predicted that many would develop mental health conditions. As was highlighted in Graeme Dey’s speech, it is important that we act. There are on-going impacts on veterans who are living with the after-effects of PTSD and who need ongoing support now, wherever in Scotland they live.

It is very welcome that the motion acknowledges the work of poppyscotland in providing life-saving services. It offers financial, housing, mental health and employment support, among other support services. Veterans who come home from combat cannot be left behind by the country that they served, so we must challenge the stigma that they often face. Poppyscotland fills gaps where there is underprovision, and the work of its services is absolutely vital.

Across the road from Parliament is Scottish Veterans Residences’ Whitefoord house, which provides supported housing for former members of the UK armed forces who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Its work is invaluable.

I want, because it is important, to finish with a few words on the impact on the Falklands war on the islanders themselves, who were grateful for support, but who themselves needed to recover from stress and from the anxiety caused by armed conflict and unexploded bombs on their land.

There are many links between the Falkland Islands and Scotland—some of the first settlers there were from Scotland. Even the islands’ name came from Scots. We have strong ties to the islands through the Scots Guards.

I am told that the dialect that is spoken in the Falklands is a very unusual mix of Scots and Somerset English. That makes islanders somewhat unique. There are 60 nationalities now living there. The Falkland Islanders are keen to use the 40th anniversary not just to commemorate their freedom and to thank those who served in the conflict, but to show the world the modern Falklands. There are research institutes for Scottish, Antarctic and Mediterranean academics. There is an 80 per cent return rate to the islands among those who leave to go to university, and there is only 1 per cent unemployment. There is maybe something to learn from that.

The state is also important in supporting islanders. There is support for people to enable them to go on holiday because of the costs, and welfare rates are very good. University places are funded to enable students to come to study in the UK and then to go home.

As we celebrate the 40th anniversary, let us remember those who put their lives on the line, not just in the Falklands but in military conflicts since then. Let us also reflect on the aspirations of the islanders, and on how we can retain and develop our links with them. I welcome the commemorative services that will be held later this month. Let us think about how we develop our links, whether that is through the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association or through our academic research links. The 40th anniversary is a celebration: we need to think not only about the past but about how we will move forward together.

18:01  

I congratulate Graeme Dey on securing the debate and Stuart McMillan for his able delivery of Graeme Dey’s speech.

As you know, this is my second contribution in a short time in a debate about the Falklands war. There will therefore be some overlap.

I am pleased that the debate is focused on the men and women who went to that war—some never to return. It was a war that took place thousands of miles away and was fought over a territory that practically none of us had heard of until we heard the drumbeats of war. Was the war necessary? Did it resolve once and for all the tensions and dispute about sovereignty? I will consider those questions later in my speech.

First, let me emphasise my regard for all service personnel who found themselves in that conflict, and especially for those who were on the front line. I express sincere sadness and regret for all the lives that were lost, and for the people—British, Argentinian and the islands’ civilians—who were injured, both physically and mentally. Death and injury do not discriminate. I recognise that damage—physical and emotional—endures among survivors to this day. I also acknowledge the professionalism and courage of our armed forces.

The toll was this: three Falkland Islanders died and a total of 904 military personnel were killed in the conflict. Of those, 255 were British military personnel and 649 were Argentinian. British forces reported that 775 service people were wounded in the war, with 115 being captured between April and June. Meanwhile, 1,657 were reported wounded among Argentina’s military personnel and more than 11,000 were captured.

I recall how horrified I was 40 years ago—I said this in the previous debate—as I travelled on the bus to my law studies, to hear passengers in front of me cheering that we should “Bash the Argies!” Jingoism had a field day, which was fuelled in particular by The Sun newspaper, which took a bloodthirsty stance from the start, gambling that that would pay off in increased circulation. It did. It invited readers to sponsor Sidewinder missiles and offered free “Sink the Argies” computer games. It splashed its front poster page with “We’ll Smash ‘Em” printed over pictures of Winston Churchill and a bulldog. It even urged the Government to reject an offer of peace talks from the Argentine military regime, with the headline “Stick it up your junta”.

War is not a desk game to be played out in print and the media, distant from the reality and responsibility of the real war—the cold, the fear on a bloody and unforgiving landscape, and the junta sending young conscript infantry into battle, often unfed and lacking even basic equipment, including proper footwear.

I am glad that Jackson Carlaw referred to the press coverage, because that coverage was, as we know, highly censored. All the significant news 40 years ago, good or bad, was announced or leaked from London. Reporters in the south Atlantic had the sour experience of hearing their news being broken on the BBC World Service. Reports were censored, delayed and occasionally lost. When relations between the press and the Royal Navy on board the HMS Hermes were at their worst, Michael Nicholson of ITN and Peter Archer of the Press Association prefaced their bulletins with the rider that they were being censored—which was, itself, censored.

There was, I believe, an opportunity to resolve the dispute about sovereignty of the Falklands by diplomacy. It might have failed, but it was not given enough time and space. I know I was not alone in having grave concerns about launching into that war and about how it was conducted. There was the sinking of the General Belgrano, the Argentinian cruiser. Was it sailing to or out of the exclusion zone? That is still under dispute. The retaliation came days later, of course, with the sinking of the HMS Sheffield off the coast of the Falkland Islands, which killed 20 men. There was no going back after that.

Was there a failure of intelligence to see the Argentinian threat on the horizon? Was diplomacy exhausted? I quote from an article in The Times, which said:

“The British Government was aware of an Argentine threat to the Falkland Islands for almost a year before they were invaded.”

I return to the lives that were lost and damaged. They must not be forgotten. I have not forgotten them, but I have also not forgotten how the loss of those lives might—just might—have been prevented had intelligence and diplomacy been tested first and taken to their limits, before our armed forces were put into a conflict.

I will finish on this. They are the words of a Welsh guardsman who spoke earlier today and who was aboard the Sir Galahad, which was a troop ship that was attacked by Argentine fighter jets on 8 June 1982 as it sat unprotected. The explosion and fire on board the Sir Galahad at Bluff Cove killed 48 men, including 32 Welsh Guards, and dozens of men were injured, some being horribly burned. When he was asked whether he thought that the war had been worth while, he replied, as a soldier would:

“Ours not to reason why, ours but to do or die.”

As politicians—after that loss of lives, loss of futures, and the scars of injury and trauma on those who served—even today, as sovereignty of the Falklands remains disputed, it is ours to reason why.

18:07  

I thank Graeme Dey for lodging the motion for this debate and my colleague Sharon Dowey for her recent Falklands war debate. I wish Graeme Dey a speedy recovery.

The motion that we are debating today specifically recognises the contribution of 45 Commando, which is based in Arbroath in my north-east region. The unit has a proud history, including taking part in the D-day landings at Sword beach, the 78th anniversary of which we marked on Monday. In 1982, the unit was again in the thick of the fighting, most notably at the battle of Two Sisters, one of the key engagements of the conflict that helped encircle the Argentine forces at Port Stanley and ultimately end the war.

Even before the battle had begun, the Royal Marines of 45 Commando had shown what they were made of. The sinking of the container ship, Atlantic Conveyor, saw the loss of almost all the transport helicopters that she was carrying, meaning that the marines of 45 Commando would have to march across east Falkland on foot, which they did, yomping 56 miles across inhospitable terrain in gruelling conditions while carrying 80-pound loads. When the battle was joined, they were the central force of a three-pronged attack on the heights around Port Stanley.

The attack on Two Sisters mountain began on the night of 11 June and carried on throughout the evening. They were met by fierce Argentine fire but again the Royal Marines showed their courage, their determination and their skill. They pressed the attack, aided by accurate artillery fire from both 29 Commando and HMS Glamorgan, and by dawn the mountain was in British hands. Four Royal Marines lost their lives and 17 were wounded; on the opposing side, 20 Argentine troops were killed—a sober reminder of the cost of war. Thankfully, the war was soon over. Within days, the Argentine forces surrendered and British forces liberated Port Stanley.

Today, the Falklands is a peaceful and prosperous place. Tourism is increasing, and the islanders continue to develop their own distinctive culture and make their own democratic decisions. All of that was possible through the sacrifices of Britain’s armed forces. Many of the sacrifices that those veterans of the Falklands made—both physical and mental wounds—are still with them, as is the case for veterans of all conflicts. I have had the honour of meeting many such veterans because of the strong military community in Tayside and my role as chair of the cross-party group on the armed forces and veterans community.

It is important that we remember the events of 40 years ago, but it is just as important—if not more so—that we continue to support the brave men and women who still bear the scars of that conflict.

18:10  

I thank Graeme Dey, my predecessor as minister for veterans, for securing this members’ business debate. I am sure that, as Maurice Golden has just done, we all wish him a speedy recovery.

The debate marks the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands and the end of the Falklands war. As Jackson Carlaw said, it is strange to think that that was 40 years ago. As I said in the debate last week, 40 years ago we were closer to the second world war than we are now to the Falklands war.

At the time, my experience was as a signaller, which meant that I was lucky enough to have a high-frequency radio and could listen to Scotland’s world cup matches, which most people could not. Unfortunately, this year I will not be able to listen to or see Scotland’s world cup matches because Scotland will not be there. That shows how things have changed in the intervening period.

This debate is different from the Sharon Dowey’s recent debate. Jackson Carlaw focused, quite rightly, on the international implications and the way in which states have responded to the Falklands war. I will come back to that, but, first, I note that he also mentioned the principle of self-determination. Although, as Christine Grahame said, the debate on how the Falklands war came about in the first place will continue, self-determination is an important principle—one that is, I think, worth fighting for.

As we near the 40th anniversary, a number of events and activities will provide us all with a chance to consider the lasting impact of the conflict. I look forward to attending the Royal British Legion event at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire to mark the official anniversary next week.

On another point that Jackson Carlaw made, in the rest of my contribution I will focus—rightly, I think—on what Graeme Dey, in the speech that Stuart McMillan read out on his behalf, wanted us to focus on: the impact on veterans.

First, I go back to Jackson Carlaw’s point about statespeople, including international statespeople. I understand that the Prime Minister will also attend next week’s event, and in the past day or two, I think that he has also said that, if he gets the opportunity, he will go down to the Falkland Islands. Jackson Carlaw mentioned how important it was for Margaret Thatcher to get advice from Harold Macmillan—he gave a couple of other similar examples. I would not refute that: getting advice in such situations is very important.

To return to Graeme Dey’s speech, I think that a really important piece of advice is that we should know about the impact of war on those who are asked to fight—both veterans and those who do not come back from war. For my part, I am more than happy to contribute to enhancing the Prime Minister’s knowledge if he wants to discuss that next week, in the Falkland Islands or at any other time, because it is extremely important that people who have the responsibility of sending people to war have a full understanding of the impact. That is what Graeme Day tried to do in his speech.

I should mention briefly, because Maurice Golden and other members mentioned it, the memorial garden at RM Condor barracks. I should also mention, as I did last week, the four people in my troop who died and did not come back: Sergeant Bob Leeming, who had a wife and family; Corporal Fitton; Corporal Uren; and Marine Keith Phillips, who was the same age, held the same rank and had the same first name as me, and who, at 19 years old, never returned from the Falkland Islands. That was the real impact on the families of those four people. Those guys were in my troop; there were other guys in 45 Commando, and many others as well, but those were the guys I knew best.

I am delighted that the Scottish Government has been able to partner with Legion Scotland and poppyscotland, as Sarah Boyack mentioned, on establishing a Scottish national event in Edinburgh on 18 June, which will provide the people of Scotland with an opportunity to commemorate the anniversary. To coincide with that event, poppyscotland is delivering a wider learning programme. In last week’s debate and again today, the point has been made that people are not aware of the Falkland Islands. That important learning programme and package of resources for schools across the country will allow young people to learn more about the conflict; it will also highlight the role of the armed forces today and how we can support them and their families.

It is important that, as Graeme Dey tried to pass on in his speech, we acknowledge the lasting impact that the experience of war can have on some members of the armed forces community. We continue to work to address that. Many veterans of the Falklands still struggle with physical or mental scars or have faced hardships in the years that followed the war. Veterans of that conflict served at a time when there was a lack of knowledge and education about the symptoms of mental ill-health, and a huge amount of stigma was associated with mental health issues.

I will mention the point that was made in Graeme Dey’s speech about the absolutely appalling coverage of the guys who were down there when the war broke out. They fought extremely bravely but then were ordered, rightly, in the face of massively superior enemy forces, to lay down their arms. It was absolutely appalling that they were described as cowards by one tabloid newspaper. It was appalling that people thousands of miles away from the theatre of conflict felt able to cast judgment on people fighting in that circumstance and call them cowards. I hope that those in the media have learned from that coverage.

Jackson Carlaw mentioned some of the ways in which the media have changed over time and the healthy engagement of the media in conflicts. We also have the reverse of that, with Putin using his media to censor things and present a very favourable account of why the Russians are wrongly and illegally in Ukraine. Therefore, it can work both ways. However, Jackson Carlaw made an important point about the changing nature of the media.

I am delighted that we have touched on that issue, and I appreciate that media coverage has changed with the passage of time. Will the cabinet secretary congratulate journalists who are currently in Ukraine? They are dodging bullets, but they are not dodging the truth.

That was very well put. We must remember that Clive Myrie and others are in real danger.

On the portrayal of the marine detachment that was in the Falklands at the time, the editor of the newspaper concerned was interviewed about that coverage recently, and I do not think that the people who made such comments lacked an understanding of the impact of such comments on the veterans who served in the Falklands. As soon as they returned to the UK, many of those veterans chose to go right back down and fight again. Some of the journalists at the time—Ian Bruce, for example, who is a fantastic journalist—put themselves in harm’s way to try to get as much of the truth as they were able to gather back to their audience.

We are also continuing to campaign to address the stigma experienced by veterans and their families. The campaign, which is led by See Me, addresses negative views and promotes positive images of veterans contributing as employees, volunteers, blue-light officers, clinicians, carers and community representatives.

Over a number of years, we have supported the mental health needs of veterans and their families through the innovative work of Veterans First Point and Combat Stress. We have funded both organisations to provide mental health services specifically for veterans and their families, and we are continuing to fund those specialist providers this year.

Combat Stress will receive £1.4 million to provide a Scotland-wide veterans mental health service. The organisation also provides a 24-hour telephone advice service, recognising that not all veterans are comfortable with online services. I know that, for older veterans, accessibility of services is really important. Combat Stress recognises that need and has recently opened two new bases, one in Glasgow and the other in Edinburgh.

We have also agreed to continue funding the six existing Veterans First Point providers. They will receive £666,000, which is to be match-funded by their local health boards and will enable veterans to access an NHS service in their community, which I know is appreciated by many service users.

To this day, veterans of the Falklands are still coming forward to seek help and use those services for the first time. More than 60 Falklands veterans requested support from Combat Stress over the past year alone. Therefore, I finish by expressing my gratitude to our close-knit charity sector in Scotland. I am sure that I speak for all here today when I say that I am continually impressed by the level and quality of support that the sector provides to our ex-service personnel and their families. I extend my heartfelt thanks to everyone who supports those charities in whatever way they can.

If members were able to participate in the remaining events to mark the 40th anniversary, or at least encourage others to participate in them, that would be gratefully appreciated.

Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes the debate. I close this meeting of Parliament.

Meeting closed at 18:20.