Public Petitions Committee

Meeting date: Thursday, November 9, 2017

Official Report 627KB pdf

---

Continued Petition

---

Armed Forces (School Visits) (PE1603)

I welcome everyone to the 20th meeting in 2017 of the Public Petitions Committee. I remind members and others in the room to switch phones and other devices to silent

Agenda item 1 is consideration of a continued petition. PE1603 calls for greater scrutiny of, and more guidance and consultation on, armed forces visits to schools in Scotland. I welcome Edward Mountain MSP, who joins us for this item. We are happy to be hearing from representatives of the armed forces in order to understand more about the work that they do in visiting schools in Scotland. I note for anyone who is viewing our proceedings that the witnesses for the first panel will not appear on screen. That is to reflect the wishes of the Ministry of Defence in relation to the personal safety of officers.

I welcome to the meeting Brigadier Paul Buttery, who is the head of training, education, skills, recruiting and resettlement at the Ministry of Defence; Wing Commander Ian Garnett, who is field force commander north at the Royal Air Force; Commander Billy Adams, who is commanding officer, recruiting field force, and area recruiting officer, Scotland and Northern Ireland, at the Royal Navy; and Major Deborah Scott, who is SO2 recruiting and engagement at the 51st Infantry Brigade and Headquarters Scotland.

I ask our witnesses to make an opening statement of around 15 minutes in total, after which members will have the opportunity to ask questions. Members will understand if there are any questions that the witnesses are not in a position to answer.

Convener, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. Thank you for accepting the offer of the Minister of State for the Armed Forces and thus providing us with the opportunity to come here and give you this presentation, which I hope will help with your consideration of the petition.

As the convener mentioned, I am head of the training, education, skills, recruiting and resettlement branch of the MOD. I work for chief of defence people and I am responsible, on behalf of chief of defence people, for the policy framework associated with training, education, skills, recruitment and resettlement. It is within that policy framework that we set in the MOD that the single services act.

I have with me Commander Billy Adams from the Royal Navy, Wing Commander Ian Garnett from the Royal Air Force and Major Deb Scott, who is representing the Army.

Our brief will consist of a number of sections. First, I will provide you with an overview of the policy that covers the outreach activity of the armed forces, after which my colleagues will explain their service’s approach to outreach activity and describe the type and volume of activity as it relates to school visits. I will then expand the presentation to provide some broader context, after which we will be at your disposal to answer questions within our areas of responsibility.

Outreach activity, which includes the visits of armed forces personnel to schools and is the main topic of this brief, is covered in our policy and in joint service publication 545. Each of the armed services has its own outreach teams, which are represented here. The outreach teams bring the armed forces to the attention of the wider community through their outreach programmes of direct-to-public external events and community engagement, which fall into one or more of the following categories: raising awareness, recruiting events, support to education and community-based engagement. Outreach teams visit educational establishments only following a specific invitation. They are not to actively recruit in schools, and students cannot be signed up or otherwise make a commitment to become a recruit in the armed forces during the course of any such visit.

The purposes of those visits, which are agreed with the establishments beforehand, can range from raising awareness of the armed forces and their place in a democratic society to practical sessions that are aligned with the national curriculums and designed to enhance teamwork, communications and STEM skills—I apologise for the abbreviation; by “STEM”, I mean science, technology, engineering and maths. The visits also build interest in the services and, in some cases, explain the wide range of careers that are available. In accordance with defence legal advice, outreach activity in educational establishments is conducted only when a letter of agreement has been exchanged with the establishment or unit and a risk assessment has been carried out of the environment and the activities that are to be undertaken, and only with a member of the establishment’s staff present and once a copy of the MOD’s insurance arrangements have been exchanged with the establishment that is being visited.

From a policy perspective, I emphasise three key points: armed forces outreach teams visit schools only in response to a specific invitation; no pupil or student is ever signed up or otherwise makes a commitment to become a recruit during a school visit; and the visits include a range of activities, such as career events, citizenship talks, raising awareness of the armed forces and their position in a democratic society, educational support—including on science and maths—that supports the national curriculums, and the team-building and leadership events that I have already mentioned.

With the convener’s permission, I would like to hand over to my colleagues, starting with Billy Adams.

Good morning, everybody. As the convener said in her introduction, I am the commanding officer for the naval service recruiting and outreach teams. The teams in Scotland are located in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee, Rosyth, Aberdeen and Inverness, and our approach to school visits is very much in line with the approach that Brigadier Buttery outlined in his brief. We do not target particular schools and we visit schools only at the invitation of the headteacher or the careers teacher.

The teams, which cover specific areas throughout the country, will offer secondary schools in the catchment area updated publications on career opportunities that are available in the naval service. The schools are requested to make that information available in public areas, such as libraries. We also offer headteachers and careers teachers a range of outreach activities that we might be able to conduct in support of the school. We offer various activities, such as practical team-building and leadership tasks, STEM-related activities, interview technique sessions, table-top problem-solving exercises and the promotion of health and wellbeing, which is achieved through physical training sessions and cookery demonstrations.

In addition to that range of curricular and supported activities, the teams offer bespoke presentations on the role of the naval service and operations that members of the service are or have been involved in. We also offer career opportunities information on those subjects. In addition, members of the teams attend bespoke school careers fairs—again, that is by invitation only.

Unfortunately for us, we have a limited number of people in our teams in Scotland. Although we cannot facilitate every request that we receive, we endeavour to fulfil as many as we can.

I am field force commander north. I am responsible for the delivery of processing and outreach activities for the east midlands, the north of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The RAF will only ever go into a school when we are invited by the headteacher, the careers master or some such personality. The RAF categorises schools according to previous application and intake history. Therefore, if a community has no record or history of RAF involvement—that is, applications to join us—we are less likely to go to that school. We will still contact the school and offer our activities, which I will come on to in a moment, but if the school does not want us to attend, we simply will not go there.

The activities that we offer are fivefold. First, we offer presentations and careers fairs. Our presentations are designed to raise awareness of the career opportunities in the RAF. We focus firmly on the apprenticeship opportunities that we offer. We can deliver an informal discussion or a formal presentation, depending on what the school requests. My personnel also attend schools and organise careers fairs along with other employer organisations.

Secondly, we offer personal development training, primarily to develop teamwork, leadership and communication skills and to allow students to assess their skills and qualities by undertaking alien tasks. Such training can enhance their employability, raise self-confidence, improve communication skills and encourage teamwork.

Thirdly, we offer interview skills workshops, in which we enhance students’ job-seeking skills by providing instruction on how to prepare for an interview, delivery and post-interview actions. Sessions include demonstrations and role playing and, if requested, they can include mock interviews and constructive feedback to the students.

Fourthly, we offer STEM activities that help to develop hard and soft skills, such as following instructions, developing a plan, teamwork, effective communication, conflict resolution and peer negotiation. They also help with the understanding of STEM principles. As a subjunct to that, we sponsor a third party to carry out a STEM roadshow across the United Kingdom; one is being carried out in Scotland at the moment. It tours schools across the UK, giving demonstrations of science, engineering and cyber in an interactive and exciting way so as to encourage students to take up science and engineering. Presenters wear RAF-branded polo shirts but are not RAF personnel. A member of the RAF is present but only to answer specific RAF questions at the end, not to give any specific presentations or careers briefs.

Other activities that we do include operation X, which is an interactive learning experience that uses multimedia platforms in a humanitarian aid mission to engage students in literacy, teamwork, communications and health and wellbeing. My personnel also visit schools to discuss visits and career opportunities with the careers masters and careers guidance staff.

As the convener said in her introduction, I am Major Deb Scott. I am SO2 recruiting and engagement, based at the brigade in Stirling. As my title suggests, I am double-hatted: as well as being responsible for the oversight of Army reserve recruiting in Scotland, I am a fundamental part of the brigade engagement team.

The Army advertises the support that it can offer schools through various channels, including the Army website and direct emails, but it also does so through educational organisations, such as Skills Development Scotland and the energy skills partnership. In addition, we are able to network at many of the educational events that we attend to inform schools about the activities that we do. Some of the schools already know about them, but some of the teachers are very interested to find out more.

The Army proactively contacts schools to ensure that the information that is displayed in their careers information libraries is current; that is usually done annually. Once schools become aware of the activities that are available, they can book some activity through a central booking service, and local connections with military units can be and are used. All recruiting group-delivered activity is formally booked by schools through the headquarters of the recruiting group in Upavon. Other Army units in Scotland visit a school only once the visit has been co-ordinated through the brigade headquarters, in liaison with the recruiting group. That ensures that activity is de-conflicted. We have issued clear direction to our Army units in Scotland, which may be contacted directly by schools, to ensure that they understand and follow the policy regarding engagement with schools.

We have numerous relationships in existence with schools that have used our services over the years to support their activity. They often contact us following an initial engagement, as they see the value in what we are able to deliver to their pupils and want it to be repeated. At no point do we visit a school uninvited; we always do so through an invitation, and we confirm that our attendance is still appropriate with the school prior to the event, if required. Reviewing whether our attendance is appropriate is an on-going process.

If a school requests our support in any form, we will try to support it if we can. We are not selective and do not look to include or exclude schools based on any set of criteria. We aim to support all schools, whether independent, state sector or special needs, and regardless of postcode area. We can deliver a range of activities, which can be tailored to meet the needs of the school’s request, subject to our resources being available.

There are various types of activity that can be delivered by the Army or—as the committee has heard—the other two services. Some activity is formal and involves the delivery of a set lesson plan. Such activity has to be booked formally. The people who deliver those activities are all Disclosure Scotland cleared under the protecting vulnerable groups scheme in the appropriate ratios and have been selected by the Army to be part of the delivery team. Other activity is more informal; such activities are usually based on ad hoc requests from schools.

09:15  

As far as the formalised activity that we do is concerned, BASE—British Army supporting education—is a range of resources and activities to support and enhance the learning experience of pupils in secondary 4 and above. It includes workshops on citizenship and science, in which pupils can design a ration pack snack. There is also a forensics lesson and a maths lesson. They are activities based on what we do in the Army. As you would expect, we use our areas of expertise to design and deliver lessons to support the curriculum. For example, the maths lesson is based on planning a skiing expedition to Norway.

Resilience, team building and leadership activity—known internally as the introductory personal development activity—are part of the BASE but, in addition, local contacts often ask us to provide them with team tasks. The Army’s core values and standards include courage—physical and moral—loyalty and respect for others, all of which can be encouraged in pupils through the team tasks that we deliver. The team-building activity is requested time and again as a repeat activity by the same schools. We also deliver mock interview skills lessons that help people to prepare for the world of work.

The Army is continuing to supporting defence’s contribution to Her Majesty’s Government’s STEM agenda. Race for the line season 3 will take place in 2017-18, following two successful years in which we ran it in conjunction with the energy skills partnership in Scotland. This year, we will run it with Scotland’s Learning Partnership. The Army—indeed, all three services—will act as hubs for local high schools that have entered the competition, which is aimed at 11 and 12-year-olds, and will assist in running race events ahead of regional and national finals. The Army was instrumental in bringing the bloodhound rocket car challenge competition to Scotland—it financed and organised the launch event at the Glasgow science centre and trained college staff to deliver the workshops. That led to the formation of college hubs and the holding of the rocket car challenge events, as well as long-term improvement in the collaboration between colleges and the local schools. We have been working closely and in direct partnership with the ESP for the past two years. In doing so, we have supported the ESP in the delivery of events—for example, big bang events and the science festivals.

The Army has a STEM youth engagement team, which has individuals based throughout the UK, and we have two personnel allocated to Scotland to support the Army in supporting defence’s commitment to increase the take-up of STEM careers not just within the military but across the board.

Operation reflect is an Army initiative that commemorates the centenary of the first world war. Trained soldiers provide direct support to teacher-led delivery of first world war lessons. With 2018 marking the centennial anniversary and the end of op reflect, we have a fundamental part to play in assisting schools in commemorating the first world war.

We inform pupils of Army career opportunities through formalised internal school careers fairs or through externally organised fairs that a number of schools are invited to attend, at which we give advice on the bursaries, scholarships and apprenticeships—the Army is the largest employer of apprentices in the UK—that are available, as well as on the various career streams on offer.

Presentations on the Army as a careers option are delivered to small groups or to full year groups. We have a set presentation that is tailored to Scotland. The school will determine the audience composition and size. The Army also offers a five-day work experience course, which gives an insight to pupils who have indicated that they have an interest in the Army as a career. That course, which informs pupils of the various career opportunities that are available and the recruitment process, is aimed at pupils in S4 and above.

When it comes to careers fairs, presentations and work experience, the policy is that anyone who is over 14 but under 16 can be given a brochure, but any further contact with the Army is subject to them providing parental consent. Those who are over 16 but under 18 can register an expression of interest at an event, but they must then attend a careers office or apply online to progress their application, which is also subject to parental consent and process checks.

The less formalised support that I have mentioned includes our attendance at events such as gala days, when we might take some of the personal kit and equipment that soldiers have. That helps pupils to understand the Army’s purpose and increases awareness of the Army and our place in society.

We also receive specific requests to support the activities of individual schools. I will give some examples. During a school’s health week, we took in the 10-man ration pack to show the pupils how it would be used. We also provided climbing walls and bouncy assault courses. At Loudoun academy, the police community support officer contacted us to ask us to assist with developing team-building skills for some troubled pupils at the school. In that instance, we worked closely with the police. In the same vein, the Army provides support to the youth advantage outreach programme in support of the violence reduction unit. That is a residential course that is aimed at teamwork and team building.

That concludes my brief on the Army’s activity in schools.

Convener, ladies and gentlemen, the Ministry of Defence has provided a great deal of evidence about where the visits have taken place and I would like to put some of that in context. Over the period from 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017, the Army made 8,635 visits to schools across the UK, and just under 8 per cent of those were to schools in Scotland. Based on the work that my team did, the Scottish population represents 8.2 per cent of the UK’s population, so we are arguably underrepresenting our visits to Scotland, albeit by only a small fraction, but I hope that you will forgive us for that. I hope that that gives a little bit of context about the scale of the visits that the armed forces do across the whole of the UK and the proportion of those visits that take place here. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I think that we found that very helpful. You have probably already answered some of the questions that we were going to ask you. The question that I was going to open up with was to ask you to confirm that you always have to be invited into schools, but it was quite interesting to hear how you let schools know that they can invite you in. Major Scott has indicated how the Army might do that, but what processes do the navy and RAF have for making schools aware that you exist and that this service is available?

The RAF contacts schools by letter in the first instance, as we do across the UK, and they then come back and contact us. However, an awful lot of the schools are repeat schools, which like our products and what we offer, and then word spreads to other schools and they contact us. A lot of it is word of mouth; for example, at careers fairs teachers will come and ask us what we do for other schools. We always write a letter annually to all schools offering our services in case they change their minds or whatever, but that is the only time we will do it. Schools learn about us through word of mouth or by letter.

A letter goes out every year to all schools across Scotland.

Across Scotland and the UK.

And for the navy?

It is very much the same for us. We send an annual letter out with updates on careers information and activities available. We learn from the previous year what activities have been popular in certain schools, or we have new activities that we would like to offer. There is a range of ways but, generally, information is spread through word of mouth; it may be that we are in contact with careers teachers at specific events and they learn what is available to them then.

Good morning to the panel. From the data that we have, and as you have touched on already in your opening remarks, it seems that the purposes of the visits can be split into two broad types: curriculum-related visits and careers-related visits. Are those visit types arranged separately or do the armed forces work with schools to offer a package of activities that might be delivered on a number of different dates? Could you expand on those processes and the discussions that you have?

I will start off and then I will ask my colleagues. As we said to start with, schools are made aware of what activities are available and the armed forces teams visit the schools on invitation from the headteacher. Then it is a case of trying to programme the visits that the school wants within the timeframe of the resources that the armed forces have. It is accurate to say that some schools are visited more than once in an academic year for different sorts of events, but I will ask Major Scott to expand on that.

As we said before, it is very much down to what the school wants. We have a leaflet that lists all the activities that we do. Usually, the schools will look at what they have in their timetable. We find that, at certain times of year, some activities are more popular than others. When it is coming up to exam periods and there is a lot of revision time, schools often request us to come in for the personal development activity. It depends on what the school wants. If a school is doing a particular focus on world war one in history, it will request operation reflect. If a school requests something that is not on our list of activities, we look at whether we have the resources and capabilities to do it, and if we have, we will do it.

Do you have figures for how many schools are visited twice or three times a year?

We have the data, but I do not have the statistics for you now. I have not calculated those numbers, but they are available.

Is it possible to share those with the committee?

I would have to check.

From the work that we did last week, the number of schools receiving three or more visits from the Army team is 70, from the Royal Navy is 14, and from the RAF is 12. The number of schools that receive visits from two different services is 98. The number of schools receiving visits from all three services is 22. That is out of a total of just over 1,000 school visits from across the three services.

That is across Scotland?

That is just Scotland, yes.

Thanks. It is good to have it on record.

One of the biggest concerns that I have—and I think that it lies behind the petition—is the potential targeting of schools in areas of higher economic deprivation. I know that those concerns are refuted, but the concerns remain. The figures that we have are that 83 per cent of state schools were visited, 50 per cent of independent schools were visited and all Army visits were made only to state schools, with one school being visited 31 times in an area. That seems extraordinary to me. Can you explain those figures?

Could I ask you what timeframe those figures are pulled from, please?

From 2010 to 2012.

The data that I have, which we have been sharing with the committee, is more recent than that, and our approach to engagement activities has matured and is quite different now. Since about 2014 we have had far more control—if that is the right word—of how our engagement activity is monitored, who actually engages and what messages are explained and delivered to the schools. I know that now there is no targeting of schools based on gender, social background or the relative level of deprivation in the surrounding area or anything like that. There is absolutely no targeting on those grounds.

But there was previously?

I am afraid that I cannot comment on whether there was or not, as I genuinely do not know. It might be anecdotal, but I would be surprised if there was a deliberate policy to do that. I would find that surprising. Certainly the current policy is not that and has not been since about 2014.

09:30  

How does that square with the Army visiting only state schools? Do you have a policy not to visit independent schools?

I do not believe that that is accurate either, I am afraid. There is no policy that says that—

No, I am asking you if you think there is, but that is according to the data.

I know there is not a policy.

So you do visit independent schools.

Yes.

All right. Thank you.

I am quite concerned that the data we have says that you visit primary and nursery schools. I am confused as to why you would do that. The MOD says that those visits are not careers visits, and yet a number of careers advisers have been visiting those schools. Can you comment on that, please?

Yes. Again, visits to any school, regardless of the age group of the school, will be only at the invitation of the headteacher. Major Scott may have details for those sorts of visits.

I do not have them to hand because we are focusing on high schools, but with visits to nursery schools and primary schools careers advisers might be double-hatted. They might have a title that says “careers adviser” but they are also part of the outreach team. For example, I work in recruiting and engagement, because we do not want to have too many people getting in touch with a lot of the places we go to, so it sits with one person to maintain control. The schools have only one point of contact as well, so it is less confusing. I have been into a primary school where I have shown my respirator and my webbing. That is the sort of thing we would do. It would not be a careers-based visit. It would be to talk about what the Army is about.

Do the navy and the RAF go into primary schools?

Yes. My teams would never go anywhere near a primary or a junior school, as they simply do not have the resources. What does happen, though, is that parents of children in a school will get in touch or the school will have a “What do mummy and daddy do?” day or a careers day and will ask dad whether he wants to bring his pilot’s uniform in and tell stories of flying fast jets. Generally it is a parent, not one of my team, because, frankly, I do not have the time to cover those schools. The event will be a generic “What do daddy and mummy do at work?” day—obviously, we have female fast jet pilots too. The parent will be asked to say what they do at work and to come in and show their uniform. It is a show and tell, not any kind of formal or structured attempt to talk to children about careers or anything of that nature—not at all.

We do not send any information, careers or otherwise, to primary schools, but an example that I can give you is that a member of my team went to a primary school in Rosyth last year at the school’s request to give a presentation for a project that the school was doing on the battle of Jutland. It was preceding a battlefield tour that the school had organised. That is the type of engagement that we have at primary level.

I am still confused as to why two schools were visited 31 times. Would that be by request from the schools?

Absolutely. I cannot think of a reason why that would be the case if it had not been for the school. I cannot imagine how an armed forces team would be entertained if it turned up at the school so many times and had not been invited. Surely the headteacher would have invited them to leave or not bother turning up any more. That is what I would do if they were becoming a nuisance.

Good morning. I am required to declare an interest before I ask a question. My husband was an Army officer, two of my sons have served in the Army and I was an RAF volunteer reserve training officer.

From the data that we have been provided, it is clear that armed forces in schools offer delivery to a wide range of year groups, but can you explain a little bit about how you address age-appropriate content and what presentations you do for different year groups?

I cannot comment on that. I am not the designer. It comes from the Army recruiting and training division, which I presume has looked at the curriculum, so I cannot answer.

From an RAF perspective, we will start engaging with pupils generally from about 14 years old with formal careers briefs and presentations; that is when we start doing the mock interviews and preparing them for life outside. The only initiative that is specifically targeted is our STEM—science, technology, engineering and mathematics—roadshow, which is for pupils from about 11 to 13. It has no careers input whatsoever. It is more to encourage STEM, because we are an entirely technological service and we want to encourage more people to do STEM—to do engineering, technology and cyber. That is the only predominantly targeted group. The rest is work with eligible personnel and eligible children. Again, by and large, it is to give them the skill sets and we do not promote the service. We merely wear a uniform. We wear a uniform when we do mock interviews, but the interview is generic. I have nothing specific to add to that.

I have to start by saying that I am disappointed that there is no naval service history in your family.

We are not near the sea.

We do not have any specific policy on how we approach various age groups, but the general rule of thumb is that, for anybody who is not looking at leaving school and heading towards a career, presentations will generally be based around providing information only. It would be information on the naval service, operations that are being undertaken, what life is like being in the service and where we are. The schools are very good, though; they will invite us to give a specific presentation or activity, depending on the year group, the age and the theme of what the school is trying to achieve, and we collectively—the three services work together on many occasions—try to deliver exactly what it is that the school wishes us to achieve.

It is perhaps worth mentioning that civil service psychologists and professional educational staff are employed in the headquarters where the products are developed,. They will be involved in the formulation of material, but I am afraid that we do not have the expertise here today to be able to answer the question about the exact process for you.

The cadet forces play quite a big part, particularly with some of the younger pupils—those in their early teens and from 12 upwards. Can you explain to the committee how you relate to or work with the cadet forces? They have quite a bit of contact in schools as well and are promoting and recruiting into cadet units? The combined cadet force is embedded in the independent school sector and it is active, often daily, because it is part of the school system. Would you like to explain to the committee how that works with careers advice and information in schools for children?

The cadets are a national youth organisation and, therefore, separate from the distinct British armed forces. They are a voluntary organisation with voluntary helpers. As I understand it, everything that the cadets do involves parental consent, either for their children to be cadets or for any of the activities that the cadets then undertake. The cadets are supported by the armed forces but, in the same way with schools, it is at the request of the cadets units; the armed forces then provide the support that has been requested.

None of us here works in the cadet space. There is a separate element of the MOD that covers cadets and reserved forces, and it might be more appropriate that that question is dealt with by them.

When I was looking at some of the papers and data, particularly on the numbers of visits and that sort of thing, I wondered whether the information requests would have covered cadet visits, which would have a significant impact.

From an Army perspective, I do not think it would, because a unit going in to support the cadets training activity is part of our normal business. A unit is affiliated to a cadet organisation, so it would be doing requests on a weekly basis and that is normal business. From a careers presentation perspective, I know that the only time we brief the cadets is once a year at their annual camp. We do not go in on a more frequent basis than that.

Good morning. Another significant concern is how, in a presentation or visit, the balance is struck between the opportunities that may be offered in an armed forces career, and the risks that might be faced by individuals who join the armed forces. How is that balance struck?

I watched the careers video last night and I thought that it was very balanced. That might be a subjective assessment, but I suspect that any such thing that is watched is liable to subjective interpretation. The video showed a diverse range of opportunities—from human resources to combat, to engineering, to logistics and a range of other opportunities. As far as I could tell, there was no shying away from activities that individuals might be called on to do in the armed forces. Equally, because the armed forces are a career opportunity, the diverse and broad opportunities that individuals have within the armed forces were highlighted.

The presentation that is given in careers fairs is just the first presentation. If an individual then wants to pursue their application to the armed forces, there are checks and balances along the way, and the risks and sorts of operations that they might be deployed upon are absolutely specifically brought to their attention.

My view is that presentations are balanced and are part of a journey. When a potential recruit expresses an interest in joining, the roles of the armed forces and what we are here to do are made very clear to them.

As a former air cadet, the question for me—it seems not to have been asked—is this: where are the armed forces getting the majority of recruits from? Are you looking to recruit predominantly through the cadet system or through schools?

We do not recruit from schools or from the cadets. That we do not do that is categorically part of our policy. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, it is written in joint service publication 545 that recruiting activity does not take place in schools. The same applies to cadets—cadet units are absolutely not recruiting grounds for the armed forces. Relative to the rest of the UK, far fewer cadets from Scottish cadet units join the armed forces than do cadets from units elsewhere in the UK.

I am not suggesting that you are actively recruiting. I am just wondering where you get recruits from.

Okay. About 16 per cent of Army recruits were cadets, so by definition 84 per cent were not. The cadets who choose to go on and join the armed forces are a minority.

That is the figure nationally in the UK. Only 10 per cent of those who join the Army from Scotland have been cadets—a lot less than the rest of the UK. The Northern Ireland percentage is the largest, at 22 per cent. I do not have a more specific geographical breakdown of where people have been recruited from or what their backgrounds are.

09:45  

If 84 per cent are not coming from cadets, I am interested to know where they come from.

I am sorry: maybe I misled you—

If only 16 per cent of the recruits to the armed forces come through the cadet system, where are the other 84 per cent coming from? Are there any figures on that? They are not walk-ins off the street.

I am sorry, but I do not have an exact breakdown. A good number of applicants start their application through the online process, and a good number are literally walk-ins to armed forces careers offices, who have a discussion with a careers officer and start their applications that way, so I think that is the two—

People can apply only online for the RAF. They can come into a careers office and talk to us, but they cannot apply there and then, so we cannot cajole anybody into doing anything. People have to have that breathing space to go away, have a think and then they must apply online. The application then goes to a civilian company that processes it in the first instance. People can apply only from our website, and a civilian company handles that. There is no other way of applying to the RAF.

I think that the question is partly to ask who are the people who are coming through the door at the moment. I will give an example from the Royal Navy; we do a new joiners survey. I believe that 44 per cent of new joiners in the navy have a family member who has previous service in one of the armed forces.

We attract a diverse range of people and we have two entry systems—one for rating entry and one for officer-level entry. We have graduates joining as ratings and we have non-graduates joining as officers because there is such a wide range of opportunities and specialisations, and people all the way up to the age cap are joining. At the moment, the age cap for regular service is 37, but that is being reviewed and the cap will, we hope, be increased slightly. We are getting lots more senior recruits, as we call them, through the door at the moment.

A stat that you may be interested in is that the current average age of an airman entrant is 24, and the average age of an officer entrant is 28, which is down from what it was previously. Our demographic bell curve suggests that we are going towards the older end of the market, rather than towards the younger end.

Interestingly, 33 per cent of entrants into initial officer training at RAF Cranwell are from our ranks—one third of our officers come from within our own organisation: we breed them and grow them and develop them within the service. As I said, however, the average ages are 24 for airmen and 28 for officers, so they are coming from post-school and post-university jobs.

That is very helpful. Thank you.

I will follow on from that line of questioning from Brian Whittle. During your recruitment process, do you capture information on whether the young people who join the armed forces previously participated in activities that you have run in schools, or attended careers presentations? Do you have any stats on that?

We do not, that I am aware of.

The navy does that for new joiners—those who join the service note where their interest was born. I do not have the exact figures, but I know that some of that will be through previous engagement with the service at school, college or university, or at events such as armed forces day, for example.

I would have thought that it would be easy just to ask whether they had been encouraged through the visits.

We ask, when they apply, where they first became interested, or what inspired them to join. As Billy Adams said, people join for a wide variety of reasons. The problem is, from a psychological point of view—we have done analysis of this—it takes three contacts before a person looks at a particular job or career; it may not happen the first time. That first time is just the catalyst—for example, the person just walking past the careers office during a coffee break when they were bored in their job, or whatever.

There are many different reasons why people join. It may be just that they saw the armed forces day parade, saw an advert, or saw a jet flying overhead when they were on holiday. There are so many variations and the reasons are very difficult to pin down. Was it our outreach programme or an advert on TV, radio or whatever media we use? It is a difficult question to answer.

As part of our consideration of the petition, we asked the Scottish Youth Parliament for its views. One comment was from an LGBT person who commented that he found the stereotypical masculinity that was portrayed discomfiting. How can you ensure that the tone and content of your visits—regardless of whether what you do is curriculum based, careers advice or whatever—are inclusive and appeal to a diverse population?

We absolutely do that. Again, I would ask what timeframe the particular presentation and that data came from. Since 2014, our presentations and policies have been directed to make the armed forces more inclusive. In fact, in respect of the LGBT community, the armed forces are highly regarded by Stonewall as an inclusive employer. We are in their top 50 employers, so—

I understand that. I think there is a wider perception, however, and I am wondering how you specifically try to dispel that.

I watched the presentation last night for my own satisfaction, and my opinion—as I mentioned before—is that it portrays a diverse workforce across a diverse range of employment. It avoids gender stereotyping. Although it does not specifically mention LGBT, my opinion is that the material that is used, and has been used since 2014, is absolutely cognisant of wanting to portray the armed forces as a diverse and inclusive employer.

Are there any other comments?

In the outreach teams we send we try to get a cross-section of personnel from across the Army, which includes females and black and minority ethnic people. It is not always possible because we are after the most suitable people to go out with outreach teams. A female might want to speak only to a female, so we try to offer that where possible.

The RAF attends pretty much every LGBT pride event across the UK. My team always goes in uniform. We have a number of LGBT people, BAME people and ladies. I have a wide range of people because we want to reflect to that community that our community is inclusive. We go to great lengths to say, “Come and join, come and have a go.” For us it is about the best athlete—if you pass the test, we will take you. We are an open organisation and we go to great lengths to be that way, so I think that what Rona Mackay described may be an old perception. All the material that we use is certainly inclusive and we are very careful in our use of language to make sure that we are inclusive.

That is encouraging to hear.

One of the difficulties is in showing that there is a person behind the uniform and that those people come from every area of society. I completely agree with my colleagues: we are charged with working hard to attend as many outreach and engagement opportunities as possible, particularly pride and LGBT events. I hope that we are achieving that.

Do you seek feedback from young people, parents and teachers on your presentations and activities in schools?

The RAF at all times invites parents to briefings of youngsters, to answer their questions. At stands, or at events, parents regularly come and have a chat with me and almost ask the questions on behalf of their son or daughter, which gets quite entertaining sometimes. We always try to include parents and make sure that they have material. We will answer any questions. We openly and positively invite parents to come and ask questions because we want them to be confident in their son’s or daughter’s decisions.

Do you have any formal method of collating feedback on people’s feelings and input about how an event went? You mentioned earlier that you continually review what you have done: what do you do to review it in order to decide whether to make changes and whether it is working?

We continually review our attendance and whether it is appropriate—perhaps based on the security situation at the time. I am not intimately involved in delivery, so I would have to consult colleagues to check whether or not we seek feedback. My view is that if we are asked back, that is positive feedback and the event has obviously been a success. If we do not get asked back, we would probably review the activity.

There is a perception that when people join the armed forces they are going out to fight. Obviously, a high percentage do not: they work behind the scenes in a myriad of apprenticeships. Do you have data on how many youngsters who join the armed forces are doing dental nursing and those kinds of jobs?

I do not, off the top of my head, have that data, but the breakdown of trades would be very easy to get hold of. I do not know whether the other panel members have such data.

Witnesses indicated disagreement.

Of course, the armed forces are structured and hierarchical organisations, so the manpower limits are well known. Each of the trade branches and trade groups has a structure within which individuals can progress their career both personally and professionally. I mentioned, when talking about the video that I watched last night, that it explains the diverse range of opportunities from human resources, to logistic accounting, to medical and dental roles, and including combat roles. It does not show the whole range of jobs because the range is so significant. I will take this opportunity to say that the armed forces provide more than 40 apprenticeship programmes. There is a genuinely diverse employment base for people to go into.

Brigadier, I thank you and your team for coming here. If I can also make a declaration, I was 12 years in the Army with eight years in the volunteer reserve, and I have a son who is currently serving. It is interesting, as Brigadier Buttery highlighted, that democratic society needs an armed service, and not just for active service. For example, I worked in Cyprus and Uganda with relief agencies, my son helped the police at the Olympics, and I was deployed to Heathrow on various occasions to do security there.

You have said that the reason for your visits to schools is clear: it happens at the request of the school and no recruiting takes place. Brigadier Buttery, could you and your team give us some indication of the costs of training somebody from the moment when they join the services to the moment when they pass out? Perhaps that would give the committee an indication of how it is important to get the right people, and not just a number of people.

I will, if I may, link back to the previous question. The range of careers that individuals can embark on in the armed forces means that the cost of training an individual varies, so the rather slippery answer is, “It depends.” Training a fast jet pilot is expensive, because of the infrastructure and the equipment. Training a doctor is relatively expensive and training engineers is relatively expensive. There are differences in overall training costs that depend on the trade and the degree of specialisation.

10:00  

I would never accuse a brigadier of being slippery, but we would probably accept that the costs are considerable and varied. Given the high costs and the huge investment that the armed services put into each individual that they train, do you agree that the quality of the individuals in a professional service matters more than the numbers? I think that that is the nub of the petition. The issue is not about trying to get numbers through the door, but about getting the right people with the right training.

I would agree that getting the right individual with the right skills and the right potential is hugely important to us. There are opportunities for individuals to gain technical qualifications, whether educational or professional, and to develop their personal soft skills, whether teamwork, communication or leadership skills—the valuable soft skills that they return to society with. Getting the right individual with the right potential to be able to train in those skills in is the predominant factor that we seek.

I am of the generation that remembers the adverts where it was all about skiing. At the same time, people were being deployed to some quite difficult circumstances.

To me, what drives the petition is the sense that poverty is the greatest recruiting sergeant for the armed forces and that people do not get told about the reality. We have heard quite a lot of evidence against that argument. What is your response to the very strongly held view that people end up in the armed forces because of limited choices, that the armed forces take advantage of that and that we are not honest about what those people might face? You talked about the pre-2014 period. In that period, was there a reflection on how the armed forces were recruiting that meant there was a change in policy, or was it something that developed over time?

We would say now that our recruiting process is honest and open and transparent. As I have alluded to, the realities of joining the armed forces are made very clear to a potential applicant once they have made an expression of interest. They are shown presentations that do not hide or shy away from what we might ultimately be required to do on behalf of the nation. That is not glossed over, glamorised or understated in any way whatsoever. We are a professional armed force and the nation would rely on us to do what was needed when it was needed.

As you mentioned, there are still on-going opportunities for individuals, which include skiing, for example, and enjoying playing sport and living a healthy lifestyle. That is part of being in the armed forces. Ultimately, however, we do not shy away from telling individuals about the sacrifice that they might have to make.

Our approach to our engagement has become more professional as the armed forces have evolved. We have had a more professional approach to our engagement activities since 2014. We have a methodology to track and record activity, and we use geomapping to help us with that process. As technology has evolved, we have embraced it to help us. Our approach has evolved to become more professional and co-ordinated, to better reflect the society with which we are trying to engage.

The suggestion was that the biggest determinant for joining the navy and the RAF is family involvement. Is that true of the Army as well?

I do not know that figure.

I do not have the figures, but, as has been alluded to, the important thing is the quality of the individual. I have no military background—none of my family has. If an individual wants to join, an individual wants to join.

I was meaning more what created the interest, rather than whether people were actively sought out. For the navy and the air force, it was previous family engagement.

I do not have the statistics for that. I would not be able to tell you.

Michelle, did you want to say something?

All of us in my family got to ski with the Army, so it still happens.

I know.

Is it correct to say that the worst recruited regiment in the Army is actually the Royal Regiment of Scotland? Prior to the amalgamation of the Scottish regiments it was the best recruited regiment. There is something about allegiance and pals regiments that used to encourage youngsters. That could be one of the things that has impacted on recruitment in Scotland.

I cannot deny or confirm that hypothesis. I do not have the particular detail of which regiment in the British Army is recruited to a greater or lesser extent than others. I would agree with your hypothesis about the community feeling and the sense of belonging that individuals have when they join a unit. The teamwork piece is part of what we do. Our organisation relies strongly on cohesive teams working together. The soft skills that individuals develop within those teams bind the men and women together. We call the skiing and the sport adventurous training. It sounds glamorous to call it skiing, because it is not just skiing in the normal sense. The adventurous element of the sporting opportunities is designed to develop leadership, team cohesion and individual courage. The regimental system supports that, in that people belong to the small teams that they join and they make friends for life. I am agreeing with your hypothesis, but I do not have the evidence to say whether it is a fact or not.

We have come to a conclusion with our questions and it is now for us to decide what our next steps are in relation to the petition. Do members have any comments or suggestions as to what those next steps should be?

That was a comprehensive evidence session. It would be a good idea to allow the petitioners to reflect and maybe come back to us with their feelings on the evidence that was given today.

I would like to ask local authorities for a geographical breakdown that names the schools that have been visited in their area, so that we can get a better picture of where the visits are taking place. I do not know whether that would be done through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.

We need to establish whether we are able to do that in relation to data. The question is, if the forces do not come in until they are invited, are there some schools that are more likely to invite them than others? We have heard evidence that when there is already an interest in the RAF, for example, people are more likely to become involved. We know that there are communities in Scotland that are connected to the Army or the Royal Air Force in a way that others are not. That would be useful information if we can get it.

It would be interesting to know.

It would be good to know not just the number of schools that have been visited, but which schools have been visited two, three or four times.

Are we moving into an area where we are looking at the policy of schools on engagement with the armed forces? Where there has been interest in engagement with the armed forces and it has been successful in terms of the curriculum, you can see the logic of why schools would invite them back. That would also be true of other groups, whether safety groups or whatever. If a school gets an interest and gets a contact, the school goes back to them.

If we are going to look at the schools that have been visited by the armed forces, it may be pertinent to overlay that with looking at armed forces communities.

Yes.

Albeit that I have declared an interest in this issue, in that I have been actively involved in going into schools, particularly with the cadet forces in direct conjunction with careers advisers, I do not see the point in pursuing the petition. I have always found engagement with schools to be extremely professional. Its purpose is not to persuade youngsters to join the armed forces by, I suppose, misrepresenting them as something that they are not. I have always found the approach to be very honest and balanced. I know a lot of youngsters who have decided to go into the armed forces and that certainly has not been as a result of visits to schools.

The reality is that a lot of the work that is done in schools is very much about building confidence and encouraging and improving children’s engagement with their own abilities. We are in danger of going down routes that are not what that work is really about.

We want to establish whether what people sense to be the case is in fact the case, in relation to the data. The committee clerk is saying that we have the data and we can analyse that in terms of schools and so on, to give confidence to the petitioners that precisely what you describe is what is happening.

Our colleagues who have come along today have sought to give that reassurance and it would be useful to get the petitioners’ response to that. I do not want to prejudge that analysis. We want to test the sense of what is happening against what the facts are. Today’s session has been really useful in that regard. Might it be useful, therefore, for us to look further at the petition once we have had a response from the petitioners?

Members indicated agreement.

In that case, I thank our witnesses very much for their attendance today. The session has been useful. It has been a longer session than we would normally have, but there has been a lot of interest in it from the petitioners. We also wanted to afford the witnesses the opportunity to respond to the committee’s questions.

I suspend the meeting so that we can change to our next set of witnesses.

10:12 Meeting suspended.  

10:17 On resuming—