That is an excellent point, and it came across at the event last night. Young people are actually very well organised and one thing that struck me is their ability to access data through digital connectivity. That is something that they are increasingly using, so it would be good if schools could match that approach.

One of the things that has been discussed a lot today is that the transition from being in the armed services to returning to civilian life is not always easy or straightforward, and a lot more needs to be done to support our veterans and, as Mr Whitfield has just commented, their families, too, because those years in service can come at a personal cost to people’s health and wellbeing. It is more important than ever that the collaborative partnerships that are referenced in the Scottish Government’s motion today are actually put into place between the public sector, the private sector and the third sector to ensure that the veterans and armed forces community get the best possible support and access to services.

Supporting health and wellbeing is essential, and the transition to new lives needs housing to be in the right place and employment opportunities to be made available. Those were key issues on which there was agreement across the chamber today, which I think is important.

There were also many comments about the excellent work that is done by local organisations. I thought that Paul Sweeney’s points about the helping heroes project in Glasgow, which does fantastic work, were particularly important, but other organisations across the country are doing similar work. As Ivan McKee noted, Whitefoord house, which is across the road from the Parliament, is run by the Scottish Veterans Housing Association and has supported and provided homes for veterans for decades.

Sight Scotland, in my region, also does important work. Its new lawn bowling team competed in the vision impairment bowling Scotland league, with matches taking place all over Scotland, and its newly created charity team took part in its first league match recently at the Jessfield bowling club in Portobello in Edinburgh. Members might not think that that is important, but when we read some of the briefings by groups such as Sight Scotland, we understand the critical importance of the associated social and cultural connections for veterans, with visits and opportunities for people to take up new life experiences and inclusive activities. That also applies to the work that is done to enable digital connectivity in order to access new skills or relearn vital life skills, particularly for those who have lost their sight through their service.

Another issue that came up several times today was the important work of the Scottish Veterans Commissioner, and her contribution on health and wellbeing, employment and skills is welcome. I want to repeat the comments that have been made by others about the two areas where she felt that more progress is urgently needed. As Paul Sweeney commented, there is slow progress on delivering mental health and wellbeing support, and I hope that the Scottish Government will pick up on that, because veterans might have experienced what for us would be unimaginable pressures, and they need to be supported. Willie Rennie also made some insightful comments about the importance of support.

Before I close, I want to comment on the homelessness prevention pathway for veterans. It was produced last year, but, as the commissioner said, little has been achieved to date, and progress in implementing that much-needed pathway is slow, with no clear milestones or timelines provided. That has been raised by several colleagues across the chamber. I say to the minister that dedicated housing needs investment, and the issue is important.

I very much welcome that, but, as three of our colleagues representing Edinburgh said when they raised the issue of the need for affordable housing, the issue must be addressed now, with actual investment.

There needs to be effective underpinning of the armed forces covenant. In our 2021 manifesto, Scottish Labour called for statutory targets to implement the covenant and to support the recommendations of Poppy Scotland in its manifesto and of the other veterans charities that have lobbied on that important issue. If Labour is elected next year, we would fully incorporate the armed forces covenant into law, because we think that it is important in terms of respect.

I asked one of my constituents what his recommendations would be. First, he mentioned the covenant and said how important it was, but he then talked about recognising the importance of veterans. He said:

“Raising better awareness among business of the skills that ex forces can bring is therefore important (and likely good for the economy!). Service personnel are measured and trained for their courage, commitment, discipline, respect, integrity, loyalty and leadership. Not to mention communication, positivity and flexibility. Who wouldn’t want more of that in their organisation?”

Those words are very well chosen, and I hope that businesses that are listening today will pick up on those fantastic veterans who can offer us their skills and talent.

I agree that Scotland needs to lead the way and that we need co-operative work, but most of the powers to decarbonise our homes lie with the Scottish Government. How confident is the cabinet secretary that the Scottish Government will meet its target of 124,000 low-carbon heating systems installed in people’s homes by 2026, given that, by May this year, only 11,341 homes had zero-emissions heating and that funding for solar panels has been removed from Scottish Government grant funding?

I thank the minister for his answer and declare an interest—my former work with the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations.

I am sure that the minister will be aware that, in the past three years, the amount of housing that has been built for social rent is way below the level that is needed, and that the city has been underfunded for years. Will the minister commit today to addressing the fundamental issue of increasing the share of funding for Edinburgh?

Does the minister agree with the City of Edinburgh Council’s estimate that 1,000 new social rented homes are needed every year over the next decade? Will he accept that Scottish Government funding is critical to delivering the required level of growth, given the population increases that we have and the fact that the house-building sector needs confidence and certainty to deliver the supply change, the staff and the land that we need to build that housing?

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the City of Edinburgh Council regarding funding to address the housing shortage resulting from population growth. (S6O-02603)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. How tight is the time for speakers? Is there a generous six minutes?

Labour will support the LCM at decision time. The Energy Bill that is currently progressing through the UK Parliament is the first piece of energy legislation of such scale to be considered since 2015, so it represents a huge opportunity to address all the key ambitions regarding the just transition and the shift to net zero. However, although commentators have described it as a “mammoth” bill, it still does not go far enough. There is much more that needs to be done.

We have just heard about where the Scottish National Party and the Conservative Party disagree, but what I will take from the debate is the fact that the Scottish Government has achieved some negotiating successes in relation to amendments to the bill. That is important.

It is important not only that the UK and Scottish Governments work together, but that our local authorities do so, too, because they are key players in delivering planning and the community heat and energy projects that we urgently need in our communities. It is important that we do not forget that.

Although the Energy Bill makes some progress, it will leave the UK falling behind in the global race for the jobs and industries of the future. The bill’s stated aims are to leverage private investment in clean technologies such as carbon capture and storage and hydrogen, and to reform the energy system so that it is fit for the future by, for example, facilitating the deployment of energy storage, appointing Ofgem as the regulator for heat networks and ensuring the safety, security and resilience of the UK’s energy system.

However, the bill could have done so much more. Although it deals with a lot of technical considerations, many of the measures that it proposes are actually quite piecemeal and timid, and they fall short of the action that is required.

I was pleased that some amendments that were tabled by my Labour colleagues in the House of Commons and the House of Lords were agreed to. I want to highlight two in particular. The amendment that removed the hydrogen levy from consumers’ bills will mean that although investment to increase use of hydrogen will still be put in place, it will not be done on the backs of consumers, who would have had to fork out huge amounts of money for high energy bills. I emphasise that it is important that we maintain a focus on the push for green hydrogen and that we support such developments across Scotland. It is a huge technological process that offers major opportunities to use our renewables—especially offshore renewables.

In addition, establishing a net zero duty for Ofgem ensures that net zero is at the heart of the regulator’s work, which is absolutely critical. There are a number of changes that need to be made, but net zero needs to hold them together.

Although the bill is a step forward, I believe that there is so much more that needs to be done in order to deliver the just transition that we urgently need. Labour supported amendments in the House of Lords that were subsequently removed from the final stage of the bill, such as on banning coal mines, which would be absolutely key to net zero.

The bill also fails to support energy efficiency standards for private sector housing in England, which would have saved tenants in England hundreds of pounds—one of the progressive policies that were cancelled in Rishi Sunak’s net zero speech. That is a huge disappointment, especially as we are discussing the bill during challenge poverty week.

Let us not kid ourselves: the bill is not perfect. We will vote for the motion at decision time, but our view is that the bill was a missed opportunity, as Renewables UK and other industry groups have commented.

If a Labour Government were to be elected in the near future, we would continue the co-operative approach of the UK and Scottish Governments working together, but we would be much bolder, because we need a sprint to achieve clean energy by 2030. We would establish “GB Energy”—a publicly owned energy generation company that would be headquartered in Scotland. We would invest in the skills that we need now in order to develop the jobs, supply chains and infrastructure to transition our energy supply. That need has come across from all the renewables industry representatives whom I have met, as well as all the companies that are involved in oil and gas that want to transition. It is critical and we need political support now. The Scottish Government needs to step up to the mark.

In addition, the development of community-owned energy projects is crucial. We are missing a huge opportunity right across the UK as well as in Scotland. That goes back to the point about having resources at the local level to get going on such projects.

Finally, Labour would establish a national wealth fund that would help to secure the private investment that would ensure that there is finance available now and in the future. That finance would support the aspirations of some of the provisions in the bill, as well as the aspirations that many of us have for a decarbonised clean power energy network in Scotland that would be affordable for households as well as businesses. That will not come from the bill. We need change, but we will support it because of the small steps forward that it will make.

I thank the minister for the advance sight of her statement. However, it tells us nothing about how the Scottish Government’s targets will be delivered.

The minister mentioned household fuel costs and that she hoped to see more innovation and community benefit. However, hope does not deliver. We need a route map to deliver now.

How many homes will be retrofitted this year and by the end of the parliamentary session? How many new jobs will be created across Scotland? Given the £40 million cut in university and college funding, how will the new training be delivered in our communities? Why has funding for households to access solar power been ended? What new funding will the Scottish Government provide to councils and communities so that they can deliver the engagement and the community and co-operative owned heat and renewables networks that will deliver investment to our communities and—crucially—tackle the fuel poverty that 38 per cent of our households now face?

I welcome the minister’s reference to renewable hydrogen, as it is critical that we produce green hydrogen in Scotland. Does she acknowledge the importance of linking to renewable electricity production and creating jobs and opportunities not just in the north-east, as she outlined, but in Grangemouth?

I appreciate the minister giving way, because he has spent seven years attacking the easy target. On the retrofitting of homes, what lessons did he learn from last year’s failure of the spending of £133 billion, and what difference will it make, particularly to people who live in flats and tenements, where decarbonisation is more of a challenge but hugely important?