Chamber and committees

Minister, you have stated clearly—we have all heard you—that the Scottish Government will not shy away from skills reform following the recommendations of the Withers review. You have mentioned that a couple of times this morning already. Can you share any further thinking on how those recommendations will be implemented? When can the response that sets out the way forward be expected?

That is clear. I am certain—I hope—that the committee will be pleased to work with the minister and the Government on that.

As has been mentioned, chapter 7 of the bill says that the person who sets up a trust can appoint a protector to it. Section 49(3)(a) says that a protector could, for a particular trust,

“determine the law of the domicile of the trust”.

On a number of occasions, the issue of where trusts are based has been spoken about as an important aspect. What is the precise nature of the power that the Scottish Government intends to confer on protectors under that section?

We have heard differing views about the potential scope and effect of the provision. Do you accept that, if the provision remains, its drafting should be improved, particularly because some legal academics have suggested that the provision should simply be removed from the bill altogether?

The legal company CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP—which, thankfully, is simply referred to as CMS—raised a key concern about section 19 on nominees as currently drafted. It thinks that it may not go far enough in capturing the ways in which trusts are used in the financial services sector. Specifically, the firm has said doubt would remain as to whether trustees can use nominee custody structures and sub-custodians. The firm said that those structures and arrangements are permitted under the Financial Conduct Authority’s client asset rules and are commonplace in the financial services sector. Will you confirm whether section 19 allows the use of nominee custody structures and sub-custodians? If it does not, will you accept CMS’s view that there might be risks with that approach or do you have an alternative view?

Should the drafting need to be improved, are you happy to work with the committee on that?

Minister, it seems a bit odd to me that an unlawful killer would be allowed to be the executor of their victim’s estate. However, apparently, that is a circumstance that pertains. Professor Paisley, Professor Gretton and a number of legal professionals and law firms have added their support for a specific proposal to clarify that an unlawful killer should not be able to be an executor of their victim’s estate. Professor Paisley proposed the idea first and others came on board with his suggestion. They told the committee that they think that the bill needs to be amended to clarify that the law does not permit an unlawful killer to be an executor of their victim’s estate. STEP Scotland identified section 6 of the bill as being potentially helpful in that respect. However, most of those who gave evidence said that dramatic action needs to be taken to address the issue.

Thank you. As you say, Professor Gretton said that he thought that CMS had raised a potentially significant point about those complex structures and that the matter requires further consideration anyway.

I will start with Mr Tydeman and Mr Miller. As far as we know, and as far as the public is concerned, there remain uncertainties and risks about the future viability of the yard. At this time, it seems that Ferguson Marine’s only other commercial income is from a contract with BAE relating to the secondment of 18 employees.

As a yard that has to maintain and grow people’s confidence, what potential other commercial income is there other than those 18 seconded people in your future plans, and how has that changed over time? Ferguson Marine was previously a very well-known yard; it had a lot of work and drew in potential contracts because of that. How are you looking forward for future potential commercial success?

Obviously, you want to continue growing that and taking on board even more young people and others who are already skilled, but what further investment will be needed to maintain a competitive building programme so that you can look forward to a future at the yard?