Veterans Support
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S3M-1861, in the name of Keith Brown, on support for veterans in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises that ex-service personnel in Ochil and throughout Scotland often suffer particular problems in areas such as health, employment, housing and pensions; welcomes the recent Scottish Government announcements of support for the Houses for Heroes Campaign, run by the Scottish Veterans' Garden City Association, and the Scottish Veterans' Fund, run in association with Veterans Scotland; believes that the commitment to assistance from a Scottish perspective is particularly important; further believes that the Parliament should be at the centre of the developing debate about how best to provide appropriate support to ex-service personnel, and welcomes any initiatives by the Scottish Government to continue to engage with the range of organisations involved in supporting ex-service personnel and addressing the challenges that they face.
I thank all the members who signed the motion, which allowed the debate to take place. The debate is important for a large swathe of Scotland's population. For propriety, I declare an interest. Veterans Scotland's definition of a veteran is anybody who has served in the United Kingdom armed forces—regular or reserve—and, for a short period a long time ago, I served with the Royal Marines.
I would like to say how many are in the veterans community in Scotland, but all that anyone has to go on is estimates. In 2005, research by the Royal British Legion estimated that just over 1 million were in the ex-service community in Scotland. Half those people are former service personnel and the rest are their families. In both categories, most members of the community are at the older end of the scale—three quarters are over 55 and 60 per cent are over 65. Most of our veterans are senior citizens, but tens of thousands of ex-service personnel who are in their 20s and 30s also face special challenges, not to mention the challenges that their partners and children face.
This is a members' business debate, so I do not want it to become a partisan session in which the Scottish Government is congratulated on excellent work—perish the thought—but it is important to recognise at the outset that the Scottish Government has gone out of its way to examine the problems that veterans encounter. The Parliament is not responsible for our citizens when they are in uniform, but when they leave service we are responsible for supporting them in their health, their housing and their chances for learning and training. I therefore welcome the Scottish Government's initiatives in that regard. From my contact with the charities that work with veterans, I know that they appreciate the Scottish Government's intent and genuine effort. I am sure that the minister will be all too happy to detail the initiatives.
The growing concern in the Scottish Government and in wider society about the issues that veterans face is mirrored by greater awareness of those problems. Cross-party effort in the Parliament has created the formal cross-party group on supporting veterans. I am delighted to be a vice-convener of that group. Its convener is Jeremy Purvis and it has Labour and Conservative vice-conveners.
There could be many reasons for the growing awareness of veterans issues; I will suggest one. Yesterday, The Herald reported that 1,500 Scots are preparing to start a tour of Afghanistan next year. The legacy of fighting protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is bringing home the reality that we as a society need to support the veterans who return from those conflicts. This week, 150 Royal Highland Fusiliers returned from Afghanistan.
People join the armed forces for many reasons and—as I can testify—often at a young age. They also take on an obligation that is required by few other paths in life—to put life and limb on the line. I disagree with the Iraq war, but I reject the idea that—whether from malice or ignorance—we should condemn those whom presidents and prime ministers send to fight such wars.
In America, where veterans have historically been held in higher and more general regard than is the case here, it is well recognised that the burden of fighting a war and surviving its aftermath always falls most heavily on those who start with the least. I learned recently at a veterans day film festival in Stirling that the number of suicides among Argentinean veterans of the Falklands war is nearly the same as the number of Argentinean deaths in combat in that war. That statistic is appalling and I worry about what the equivalent figure might be for forces from Scotland and the UK.
Even without active service in conflict, the military lifestyle is the furthest from a regular 9-to-5 job that can be imagined. It is intense and at all times close and personal. It is no pun to say that it is regimented to the last detail. Moving from that to a lifestyle in which the first stop is most likely to be a college or a job centre is a radical change that can affect a person profoundly. Veterans Scotland brings together 31 organisations and charities whose work is dedicated to helping with all aspects of that transition for many years—sometimes even a lifetime—after. Organisations deal with specific services, types of welfare and forms of recruitment. The problems in practice are no less varied. Listing all the issues that face veterans in those circumstances would be impossible in an hour, so I will not try to list them all.
I mentioned the mental health of the ex-service community. While national attention focuses on alcohol abuse, we should consider whether veterans have a particularly difficult relationship with alcohol and substance abuse, and take that into special consideration in our national strategies.
There is also a widespread problem in housing. Although the difficulties that some veterans face are shared by the mainstream, other veterans need adapted housing and specialist help or would benefit from being part of a certain community. Recently, I suggested that veterans housing charities should have first priority, or more favourable terms, when the Ministry of Defence sells off land or property. The idea is interesting, and the Scottish Government could explore it further with Whitehall.
I am delighted that the cross-party group has managed to achieve an undertaking from the MOD that it will attend all our meetings. The issues are difficult to address if the Scottish Government or Westminster try to address them alone. Collaboration is important in all of this.
There are, of course, many other possibilities. I recommend that all members read Poppyscotland's "Meeting the Need: A report into addressing the needs of Veterans living in Scotland". I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice has taken forward the concerns that I and others have raised on the location of fatal accident inquiries that result from the deaths overseas of Scottish and Scotland-based personnel. As we have heard, it can be traumatic for families, who wait years for an FAI to take place, not only to have to travel down south but to remain there for the duration of what can be protracted investigations. Furthermore, an FAI can make families relive events that they may have been trying to forget.
Much is being done, but much remains to be done. I am sure that other members will add their personal experience and that of their constituents and organisational contacts. I am delighted to have secured the debate and that it has given the chamber the opportunity to debate the subject.
Whatever else Holyrood does, Scots who have fought in wars or worn a uniform, and their partners and families, deserve nothing less than to be centre stage in our considerations.
I congratulate Keith Brown on securing the debate.
We are all aware—as are our families, friends and neighbours—of service personnel who have returned to our communities. Many of us will be aware of the challenges that service personnel face on their return to so-called civvy street. On a practical level, as Keith Brown said, it must be difficult for service personnel to adjust from having almost every action directed to having to make all their own decisions—and in constantly changing circumstances. Although I will concentrate on housing, I acknowledge that veterans may need to access health, training and other services.
My first experience of service personnel returning to their communities was when two ex-Army men contacted me when I was an Edinburgh councillor. One was very organised: he had put his name on the housing waiting list while he was in the Army. Given that he had accrued a good number of points, he and his family were duly offered a suitable property. The second man was not so well informed: he had not put his name on the list and he did not know the procedures. A lot of work went into finding him suitable accommodation.
Housing allocation policies have changed since then, and local authorities may have different practices, but those examples raise a number of issues, the first of which relates to the advice that serving service personnel are given on their prospects. What advice does the Scottish Government offer local authorities on rehousing service personnel?
Some service personnel will return with straightforward housing needs, but a significant number will return with physical or mental disabilities. As elected members, none of us can be unaware of the high demand for adapted housing in the rented and owner-occupied sectors. What is the Scottish Government doing to make finance for adaptations available?
Veterans with mental health needs face uncertainty about the additional support that is available to them. Previously, such services were provided through the supporting people funding stream. As we all know, that funding stream is no longer available; the money is now part of non-ring-fenced council settlements. What reassurance can the minister give the chamber that such services are being maintained in all local authority areas?
Responsibility for veterans rests primarily with the Westminster Government, but responsibility for many services that veterans will need to access are devolved, so it is appropriate for members of the Scottish Parliament to question the Scottish Government on what it can do to assist veterans when they leave the services.
The main housing challenge for many veterans is accessing housing in competition with others in our communities who are seeking suitable housing, whether adapted or otherwise. Will the minister say how increased housing supply throughout Scotland can be provided to ensure that it meets demand, particularly that of those who leave our services? Will he ensure that adaptations and support are available to those who need them?
The needs of veterans and their families for public services cannot be divorced from those of the rest of the community. The minister needs to answer the big-picture questions if we are to address the varied needs of veterans.
I see that I have run out of time, so I will leave it at that.
I commend Keith Brown for the motion and congratulate him on securing this important members' business debate. As he said, as a veteran of the Falklands conflict he has a personal interest in the matter. Not having served in the armed forces, I have a great deal of admiration for those who have.
I commend Veterans Scotland for its work promoting issues regarding Scotland's veterans. It acts as a co-ordinating voice for the benefit of the ex-service community in Scotland, and it has been instrumental in making the Scottish Government listen and learn about the fate of our veterans. I, too, put on record my thanks to all the local and voluntary organisations that provide daily support to veterans who need or ask for assistance.
As Keith Brown said, there are about 500,000 veterans in Scotland. They are courageous and dignified individuals who have served our country with pride. They either fought for our country or were ready to give their life to protect the United Kingdom.
When they talk about veterans, many people have an image of elderly men and women who fought in the great war or world war two. The reality, of course, is that many young men and women who served in Iraq and in other recent conflicts are also now veterans. That fact was brought home to me recently when I spent a day quad biking in Strathbraan in Perthshire with veterans who were holidaying at the British Limbless Ex-Service Men's Association home in Crieff. The sad fact is that most of them were younger than me—and, despite their disabilities, far better quad bikers.
We have already heard about the need to provide our veterans with appropriate health care, housing and pensions. The Conservatives strongly support those calls, and we believe that veterans who require assistance should receive it.
The sad fact is that for decades, if not centuries, veterans have not been well enough treated by this country. There is nothing new in that. A couple of years ago, while visiting South Africa, I visited Rorke's Drift in Natal—the scene of that famous battle which was part of the Zulu wars in 1879. Rorke's Drift has entered history not just because of the famous Michael Caine film but, more significantly, because on that day 11 Victoria crosses were won by defenders of the mission station—the highest number won in any single engagement in the history of the medal.
The untold story of Rorke's Drift is what happened to the survivors of the battle. As we learned when we visited, despite their being feted as heroes, there was little practical support for them when they returned home. Undoubtedly and unsurprisingly, many suffered from what would now be recognised as post-traumatic stress disorder: a number ended up committing suicide, others died in poverty or in mental institutions. It is a sorry tale that sits at odds with the popular perception of war heroes.
There are many issues that can be explored. I fear that the time given for a members' business debate will not allow us to cover them all, but I will refer to one aspect that is mentioned in Keith Brown's motion: the houses for heroes campaign run by the Scottish Veterans Garden City Association. My former colleague James Douglas- Hamilton plays a role in that association, which provides affordable housing for ex-members of Her Majesty's forces, the merchant navy, the police and the fire service who have suffered some form of disability or chronic illness during their service or since leaving. Its houses for heroes campaign is one of the most worthwhile campaigns that is being undertaken in Scotland, and I hope that its appeal for 60 more houses will be successful. I would be interested to hear from the minister the latest the Scottish Government has to say on the campaign and how it intends to support it.
All Scotland's ex-servicemen and women should be given the level of care that reflects their great service and commitment in protecting our country. Those courageous men and women stood up and protected us; it is now our duty to stand up and help them.
I join others in commending Keith Brown for securing the debate, which is about precisely the type of issue that we should debate in members' business. It is a credit to Mr Brown that he has secured time for it and is obviously committed to the issue.
All MSPs receive casework and it is often hard to consider whether one group of constituents should receive special treatment or special consideration over others. However, we must acknowledge that we have asked considerably more of our servicemen and women than their salaries compensate them for. Parliament and the Scottish Government must recognise the need to change the way we support our veterans. Regardless of politics, young men and women have gone into conflict and areas of danger on their country's behalf and, as Murdo Fraser said, we have let them down over the years.
It is welcome that the minister launched a specific consultation to focus attention within Government on support for veterans. No doubt he will outline that work to us. To be fair, it is similar to work that was carried out by the UK Government. It is worth acknowledging that, north and south of the border, there is better focus on the support that needs to be provided.
I have a constituency interest in the issue, in that constituents of mine from the Borders will be deployed. The Royal Highland Fusiliers are now barracked permanently at Glencorse in my constituency and constituents of mine from there have been deployed. Communities that I represent have suffered losses, which have been keenly felt.
Increasingly, there are young men and women who require support for more complex needs than those for which it was previously perceived veterans need support. I was struck by the information that, in 2006, Combat Stress had more than 400 active clients in Scotland, of whom 35 per cent were divorced or separated, 65 per cent were unemployed and 66 per cent were between the ages of 30 and 60. Although Combat Stress supports many second world war veterans, the vast majority of its clients have served in more modern conflicts. Recent data indicate that the average client is aged 45, has served 12 years in the services and left the military 14 years previously.
We must build future-proof policies for veterans' future needs in Scotland. Veterans Scotland and Poppyscotland estimate that, in 2025, there will be around 180,000 veterans and more than 200,000 dependants of veterans in Scotland. Therefore, decisions that Parliament and Government take now for our public services are important.
That is one of the reasons for the establishment of a cross-party group on supporting veterans in Scotland, of which I am delighted to be a member. Its inaugural meeting will be on Tuesday, and I am very pleased that the Minister for Communities and Sport will be at the meeting to outline the Scottish Government's work. With colleagues in Parliament, we will discuss our forward work programme, which will focus on health and wellbeing and on national health service priority treatments for veterans. We will also consider drugs and alcohol services for our veterans and how to bring additional focus to training, skills and employment opportunities, as well as housing needs. I hope that the cross-party group will act as a liaison, too, for local organisations to give feedback to us as MSPs about what they decide are their priorities. That will be the start of giving due recognition to the cross-party support that we must provide. Again, I commend Keith Brown for allowing us to focus on this issue.
I, too, commend my colleague Keith Brown for securing the debate. I am pleased about the formation of a cross-party group on veterans. I, too, will be a member and will attend the inaugural meeting next week.
Scotland has a long and proud military history, and the names of Scotland's historic regiments are known around the world: our soldiers, sailors, airmen and airwomen have served with great distinction and honour. Over many centuries a disproportionate number of Scots have served in the British armed forces. However, at a time when UK armed forces are engaged in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and are deployed in various peace missions around the globe from Serbia to the Falklands, there is a need to look again at the services that are provided for our personnel when they are stationed in Scotland and are accessing public services for which the Scottish Government and local authorities have responsibility.
When brave men and women leave the armed forces and settle in Scotland, they should be able to access services that are adaptable and responsive and that meet their needs. The health and wellbeing of all Scotland's people are, of course, a priority. However, for certain groups and individuals in society, there are significant barriers to achieving that. For some people who leave the armed forces, health issues can take many years to become manifest and, as has been touched on, may not be obviously linked to their period of service.
I am pleased that the Scottish Government extended its priority treatment scheme to all veterans, including reservists, as of 29 February this year, which means that any veteran who needs treatment as a consequence of his or her service is entitled, based on clinical need, to priority treatment in the NHS. That goes beyond what is available in England, where reservists are not entitled to priority treatment. A partnership of the MOD, Lothian NHS Board and veterans organisations, including Combat Stress, is undertaking a pilot project to provide services for veterans who experience mental ill health.
Service personnel and their families should retain their existing position on the pathway of care when they are obliged to move in Scotland. In addition, we must ensure that veterans who lose limbs on active service receive from NHS Scotland state-of-the-art prosthetics similar to those that are issued by the MOD's defence medical services.
To ensure that the armed forces are given fair treatment, the Scottish Government will give them priority access, alongside tenants of social rented housing, to shared equity schemes under the low-cost initiative for first-time buyers—LIFT. That measure will assist in retention of serving forces personnel by allowing them to get a foot on the housing ladder, where that is sustainable for them. People who leave the armed forces can be vulnerable to homelessness, particularly when they leave in a relatively unplanned way or have little prior experience of being responsible for their own home. I am pleased that Scottish homelessness legislation ensures that applicants who are vulnerable because they have left the forces will be treated as having a priority need for accommodation.
Current arrangements in Scotland for assessing entitlement for grants for adaptations already disregard all war pensions and associated mobility supplements when testing the resources of grant applicants. However, account is taken of income from savings that could include compensation in the form of lump-sum payments, although the payments themselves would be disregarded. The Scottish Government is consulting on proposals to abolish the test of resources and award a grant at a minimum rate of 80 per cent, rising to 100 per cent for applicants in receipt of particular income replacement benefits. I welcome that. Local authorities will have discretion to increase the grant award to above 80 per cent for applicants who are not entitled to 100 per cent. Service personnel whose sacrifice has resulted in an injury need not only sympathy but real support, and they have an on-going requirement for adapted housing. Further work must be done with Scottish social landlords to ensure the allocation of such housing to veterans.
I believe that the provision of concessionary bus travel for injured veterans is vital. As previous speakers pointed out, not all veterans are older people. I am pleased that the forthcoming review of the Scotland-wide free bus travel scheme for older and disabled people will consider extending the scheme to veterans. I look forward to seeing the Scottish Government's response to that consultation.
There may be greater benefit from closer working between local armed forces personnel and local authorities in Scotland. I believe that they have many mutual interests. Perhaps some work can be done in that area through community planning partnerships, as part of the historic concordat.
We need a coherent package of support for our armed forces personnel and veterans. I look forward to the Scottish Government delivering that, with co-operation from all parties across the chamber.
I, too, congratulate Keith Brown on securing the debate, which, like others, I am pleased to support. I also look forward to attending the first meeting of the cross-party group.
On the critical issue of the care and rehabilitation of veterans, I find myself in sympathy with the hard-hitting and angry words that were offered by the Democratic senator, Jim Webb, in his congressional response to President Bush's state of the union address last year. Senator Webb, who is a Vietnam veteran, said:
"Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues—those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death—we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.
We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us—sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it."
That statement would resonate deeply with our veterans here in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom.
The trust that is put in our political leaders by our armed forces must be repaid by an overriding concern for the welfare of our servicemen and servicewomen. If they return to our shores wounded or distressed in other ways, it is our bounden duty to provide them with the very best medical treatment, care and rehabilitation. They must not be forgotten once they leave the hospital ward. They must be given every assistance to adapt comprehensively to life in their communities.
In fairness, the Scottish and UK Governments now show a greater willingness to honour the state's responsibility for its armed forces than was the case hitherto. Down the years, our veterans were simply disregarded. I hope that that will never be the case again.
Erskine home is in my constituency, and I visit it whenever I can. Over the past nine years, I have seen a difference in the age of the veterans—a point that Keith Brown mentioned. I had always thought of a veteran as an older person, but that is no longer the case because of the various conflicts that take place around the world. At the moment, the youngest veteran in Erskine home is 24 years old.
What is it like for families who see sons, daughters, partners, sisters, brothers, mothers and fathers return home broken not only in limb but in mind? What is it like when they end up in Erskine care never to be the same person again? Why should they need to come to me, as their local elected representative, for support and help when, for example, they need adaptations in their home—as Mary Mulligan mentioned—or help with work? Why are those things not provided automatically?
In the past, when men—usually men—came home from conflicts and were what was described as "not quite right", we did not have the medical knowledge about mental health problems that we have now. Today, we have the knowledge, so why do the services not swing immediately into action?
Services for which the Scottish Parliament has responsibility include the national health service, the whole gamut of local authority provision and the police and prison services. Are those services actively involved in helping to provide, for example, appropriate employment? Is anybody talking to those people? If not, why not? I look forward to having such discussions with the representatives on the cross-party group.
The Scottish Government's decision to dedicate £127,000 in funding over the next three years for projects and organisations that work directly with war veterans and their families will certainly ease the burden. As Murdo Fraser said, the houses for heroes campaign plans to raise £6 million to provide 60 wheelchair-friendly houses. Let me put in a plea for wheelchairs that are fit for purpose. As I pointed out in a previous members' business debate, the design of wheelchairs is sometimes 30 years old, and wheelchairs must be fit for purpose.
I cannot help thinking that the Scottish Government could do more. For example, monetary support is needed for a 45 per cent expansion in the number of Erskine beds to meet growing demand from across Scotland. Providing such support would be a good start, given that Erskine must raise nearly £3 million per year. The help for heroes rugby match—on which I lodged a motion that many members signed—was held last week. I watched the match, which was very emotional. Some 50,000 people attended the event, and it made more than £1 million. However, I was very angry that I had to lodge that motion in the first place.
As Senator Webb said, we owe our veterans
"sound judgment, clear thinking, and concern for"
their
"welfare".
I would add that we owe them automatic help and support that is free at the point of need when they come home.
Presiding Officer, it is an honour to offer the Government's response to the debate. I thank Keith Brown for lodging the motion and congratulate him on securing the debate. I am also grateful to other members for their insightful and informative contributions.
It is important to me, as minister with responsibility for veterans issues, that the Scottish Government does all that it practicably can to ensure the welfare and wellbeing of our veterans. I am only too aware of the issues that can befall some of our ex-service personnel, of the complex and sometimes unique difficulties that they can face as a result of their service, and of the exceptional pressures that military life can place on them.
Members will be aware that, for the vast majority of personnel leaving the armed forces, the transition back to civilian life is smooth and trouble-free. For a minority, however, the journey back to civvy street and reintegration with civic society is far from easy. A range of obstacles and barriers in areas as diverse as housing, health, social care, education, employability and social inclusion can conspire to deprive those men and women of opportunities to lead fulfilling and successful lives outside the services.
Whatever the barrier or cause, it is for the Government to do all that it can, in partnership with the Ministry of Defence and the wider veterans community, to meet the needs and aspirations of our ex-service personnel and their families. That is why we have introduced a series of measures and initiatives that are aimed directly at benefiting veterans living in Scotland. Perhaps the most fundamental of those was the publication in June of our commitments paper alongside and complementary to the MOD's command paper, both of which set out what the Government has done for veterans and what we intend to do in the future in areas such as housing, health, education and skills, as well as in transport, support for families and wider access to public services. For the first time, the Scottish Government has set out a programme for assisting our veterans across Scotland and refocusing our efforts to combat the complex and varied issues that they face.
We have already made a start in fulfilling our obligations. For example, priority treatment has been extended to all veterans with a condition associated with military service on the basis of clinical need. Moreover, we will start the pilot of a new approach to community-based mental health services for veterans along with NHS Lothian and other partners in November. Other proposals in the commitments paper include provision by NHS Scotland of state-of-the-art prosthetics to injured veterans, to a standard similar to that provided by the defence medical services; priority access for service families to shared equity schemes to make house purchases more affordable, which we announced in June; improved access to higher education for service leavers with six years' service; and continuous automatic entitlement to the blue badge scheme for severely disabled veterans.
That is by no means an exhaustive list, but I give Parliament an unequivocal assurance that the Scottish Government is fully committed to fulfilling its obligations, and we will work strenuously with the MOD and veterans charities to ensure the implementation that most benefits our veterans. This morning, I met the heads of the armed forces in Scotland to discuss how we can work together to successfully implement the proposals.
The Government recognises that some of our veterans have to deal with the sometimes devastating physical effects and psychological impact of combat. I take the opportunity, therefore, to extend my appreciation to the many charities that tackle those issues head-on, such as Combat Stress, Erskine and Poppyscotland, which, along with a raft of other charities the length and breadth of Scotland, do exceptional work. Much of that work is unheralded, but it is nonetheless appreciated by those who benefit.
Of course, more can and must be done to deliver for veterans. In many respects, the veterans organisations are the best people to undertake the work that is needed. However, it would be wrong for the Scottish Government to sit back and expect those charities and organisations to shoulder the burden on their own.
Until now, the Scottish Government has not provided dedicated funding for veterans issues in Scotland. However, with my announcement in May of our intention to introduce a Scottish veterans fund, we have rectified that shameful anomaly. The fund will make almost £0.25 million available to veterans groups and charities over the next three years, and will be aimed at projects that deliver new or innovative approaches to veterans issues, or that seek to develop areas and activities that are not currently funded. We expect to receive the first applications to the fund by the end of November.
Furthermore, to ensure that the needs of veterans are reflected in future policy development, Dr Kevin Woods, the director general of health, has been appointed as the Scottish Government's armed forces and veterans advocate. Dr Woods will also join the MOD external reference group that is overseeing implementation of the command paper. Furthermore, the Scottish Government has now established a dedicated team within its social inclusion division to deal with armed forces and veterans issues, and to take forward our commitments and obligations. Officials are also examining the opportunity to set up an armed forces and veterans forum, which would be chaired by me, to provide for more direct engagement between Government and stakeholders.
The Government does not presume to have all the answers to the issues that our veterans face, but we are determined to work with colleagues and stakeholders to make a tangible and meaningful difference to their lives. I do not offer quick-fix solutions—that is not possible. Some immediate steps can be, and have been, taken, but our work will be an on-going process. It is a developing policy front. Many of the improvements that we seek are long term and will take months and perhaps even years to realise, so we must ensure that we maintain the momentum of the past few months.
To that end, I welcome the recent creation of the new cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on supporting veterans. As has been mentioned, a meeting of the group has been arranged for 30 September, and I am grateful for the kind invitation to join it to explore the opportunities that we have before us. I am also delighted that we can move forward in a cross-party, non-partisan way, and I look forward to being able to work closely and constructively with the group in the future.
I hope that many of the issues that have been raised in the debate have already been dealt with. Mary Mulligan and Murdo Fraser mentioned housing. It is true that in June we announced that priority access to our shared equity schemes would be open to forces personnel and recent veterans. We are also working closely with the MOD to identify suitable surplus MOD land sites and housing that can be used to meet housing need. We have already had the first transfers of housing in Fife.
On adaptations, we propose to abolish the test of resources and to award grant at a minimum rate of 80 per cent—the current rate is 50 per cent. The adaptations grant will rise to 100 per cent for people who are in receipt of particular income replacement benefits. Even if people do not receive those benefits, local authorities will still be free to increase the award from 80 per cent to 100 per cent if they so desire.
As regards the mental health issues that Trish Godman raised, I very much agree with the excellent work that the organisations concerned have done. Earlier this year, we increased by 45 per cent the fees that are paid to Combat Stress to provide specialist mental health care and treatment, but I agree that much more still needs to be done.
As I have said, the Scottish Government is committed to doing all that it can to improve our veterans' quality of life, but the announcements that were made over the summer will mean little without the continued efforts of all those involved to ensure the implementation of the measures that have been outlined. I look forward to taking up that challenge and to working with the MOD, veterans organisations and the Parliament—in particular, the cross-party group—to ensure that that happens.
Meeting closed at 17:42.