 The next item of business is a debate on motion 8-8-7-0 in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville on charities, regulation and administration, Scotland Bill at stage 1. I would ask those members who would wish to speak in the debate to please press the question to speak buttons and I call on Shirley-Anne Somerville, cabinet secretary, to speak to and to move the motion around nine minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I move the motion in my name. I'm pleased to open this debate on the general principles of the Charities, Regulation and Administration Scotland Bill. This bill was delayed due to the pandemic, so I'm glad that we are now able to progress it here today. Let me start by thanking the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for their thoughtful consideration of the bill and their stage 1 report, which expresses support for the bill's general principles. I also want to thank all the stakeholders who have taken the time to express their views through oral and written evidence both to the committee and through discussions with my officials. I'm also grateful to Oscar the Scottish Charity regulator for its valuable contributions on this bill. As I'm sure everyone in this chamber will agree, charities are a crucial part of our society and of our communities, and it is therefore imperative that we have the right regulatory framework in place to ensure that we can continue to support our charity sector and maintain public trust in how charities operate. The Covid-19 pandemic brought into sharp relief the importance of charities right across Scotland and the vital services that they provide on the ground. Charities are widely supported by the public, trust in them and what they deliver is high, and we want to keep it that way. The Charities trustee investment Scotland Act 2005 is now over 17 years old and the charity sector has changed significantly in that time. That's why we're aiming to strengthen and improve charity regulation through updating the 2005 Act. I'm pleased that charities have voiced their support for this bill and its principles, which will increase transparency of charities and proportionately extend Oscar's powers. It is encouraging to see that the committee supports all provisions within the bill, particularly information about charity trustees and charity accounts, both of which will increase transparency and will in turn strengthen and enhance public trust and confidence in the Scottish charity sector. The stage 1 report sets out positive conclusions and constructive recommendations that my officials can take forward. Turning to the specifics of the bill, the overall aim is to strengthen and update the existing framework rather than to revisit the fundamental principles of the 2005 act. The bill is built around proposals put forward by Oscar based on its operational experience since the 2005 act came into force. Further to this, following engagement with Oscar and the Law Society of Scotland, the record of charity mergers at section 12 is proposed, which will improve access to legacy income for many charities, and a list of minor or technical amendments were also added. The Scottish Government consulted in 2019 and 2021 on the proposals put forward by Oscar with over 400 written responses in total. Both consultations showed strong support for the proposals and that stakeholders are keen to see changes brought forward. The bill covers a range of different provisions designed to enhance the existing framework. Each of the provisions falls under one of the three primary aims. The first is increasing transparency and accountability in charities by improving public access to information about the charity's operations. The bill requires Oscar to publish the accounts for all charities and to include the name of charity trustees on the Scottish charity register. Oscar will be able to maintain a schedule of charity trustee details for its own internal use and provide a publicly-searchable record of the small number of individuals who have been removed from holding trustee office by the courts. The stage 1 report recognises the balance the bill provides between the overarching need for transparency and the safeguarding of individual safety and security. The second aim is providing stronger powers for Oscar, including the power to issue positive directions to help charities to address regulatory issues. We all want to see good regulation, improved openness, accountability and transparency for our charities. We also need to ensure that those charities are well served by the regulator, so can I ask the cabinet secretary who regulates the regulator? If a charity feels that they have not been treated fairly or communicated well with, who can he go to for adjudication during the process of interacting with Oscar? The member raises a very important point. Clearly, there is the complaints procedure within Oscar. Of course, if the individual or charity remains dissatisfied, there can be further moves to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman. If there is a concern about the role of the regulator, I think that this is one of the aspects that can, if people desire, be looked at in the wider reform work that will come forward on charity law. If I can move on to the second aim about stronger powers for Oscar, the bill gives Oscar a new power to issue positive directions to charities in addition to the existing powers to issue preventative directions. It also allows Oscar to conduct inquiries where necessary into former charities and their trustees. Oscar's powers and duties are enhanced by enabling Oscar to remove a charity from the register where it fails to provide accounts and fails to respond to communications. There is also a new provision that requires Oscar to refuse to enter an applicant on to the register where it considers that it would not be appropriate to regulate the applicant because it has no connection or only a negligible connection to Scotland. Oscar is also empowered to appoint interim trustees to a charity in certain circumstances, for example where the charity has no trustees or the existing trustees cannot be found. Furthermore, the bill will make some adjustments to Oscar's processes around gathering information in connection with inquiries in order to make them more streamlined and efficient. I am grateful to the committee for its support of those new powers and for the questions that it has posed around the practicalities of the appointment of interim trustees. I understand the committee's desire for more information on how Oscar envisages that new power will work, especially in the light of difficulties faced by many charities on the recruitment and retention of trustees themselves. I understand that Oscar intends to write directly to the committee on that point and on other areas requested in the stage 1 report, including plans for communicating the changes with charities and providing guidance. The third aim is to bring Scottish Charity law up to date with some key aspects of charity regulation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, enhancing public trust in charities and further protecting charitable assets. That will be achieved through updates to criteria applying to the disqualification of charity trustees and the extension of disqualification to individuals employed in charities who exercise specified senior management functions. I am glad that the committee agreed that it is sensible for Scotland to align the trustee disqualification criteria with the rest of the UK to enhance the sector's ability to carry out due diligence. I also appreciate the committee raising the important issue of trustee and senior management diversity within the charity sector. I share the committee's view that those with lived experience can and should bring valuable and often unique contributions to charity boards. The bill enhances protection for charitable assets through the creation of a record of charity mergers and the new provision of redirecting legacies where a charity has merged. The stage 1 report asks the Scottish Government to consider whether other types of gifts to charities can be included in the record of charity mergers, and the Government is assessing that possibility. One aspect of this, which I do not think that we have necessarily had clarity on at stage 1 of this bill, was with regards to lifetime gifts when a charity does go through a merger. Just wondered what work Government were doing ahead of stage 2 to provide that clarity? The type of work that I refer to just in my remarks that I made before the intervention, I am keen to look at it. I am very happy to work with members of the committee and other members across the chamber to see what more can be done in advance of stage 2. I am happy to take that forward with Mr Briggs should he wish to do so. The bill makes practical improvements and updates existing charity regulation in the role of Oscar, which is why we have consulted pre-pandemic and why we are taking that forward. I know that stakeholders want to see long-term changes to charity regulation. I want to be clear that this is not the purpose of this bill. It is intended to sustain the effective and supported regulation of charities during those challenging times. However, as I have mentioned in my response to Gordon MacDonald, I believe that there is a need for a broader review of the future of charity regulation, which is why I am pleased to recommit to a wider review following the passage of this bill. The stage 1 report helpfully sets out stakeholders' views on areas for consideration as part of that wider review, and we will ensure that we will engage with the charity sector further on the scope of that review and how it could be shaped. This is a technical bill. It is a very focused bill that provides improvement for the charity sector by strengthening and enhancing the existing regulatory framework. I hope, therefore, that the Parliament will agree and I hereby move the motion in my name. I now call on Collette Stevenson to speak on behalf of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. I am delighted to be speaking on behalf of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee as its new convener. Before I get into the substance of the committee's scrutiny work, I would first like to thank the outgoing convener and deputy convener Natalie Dawn and Emma Roddick, as well as the wider committee for their diligent scrutiny of the charity's regulation and administration Scotland bill. Although the bill is small in size, it belies the technical complexities that the committee had to grapple with. The bill aims to update and strengthen the 2005 Charities and trustee investment Scotland act and provides an opportunity to improve the regulation of charities as well as to reinforce public confidence in the sector as a whole. As Chaz told us, charities are in a privileged position with regard to handling donations from the public. Those are things in relation to which public accountability is important. The committee saw a breadth of views, including from the third sector, designated religious charities, as well as from law, accountancy and audit professionals. The committee is extremely grateful to all those who engaged with us. One of the objectives of the bill is to bring Scottish charity legislation up to date with key aspects of regulation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Technical changes that the bill brings about will help regulation in Scotland to keep pace with that of other jurisdictions. However, evidence gathered demonstrates a desire to go further. For a wider review of charity law, we understand that the Scottish Government has provided such a commitment, and we welcome that. It has been almost two decades since the 2005 legislation was enacted and the use of digital systems means the world and the way we work has changed significantly. Witnesses made clear that it is essential that any review is independent and crucially carried out in consultation with a wide range of people and organisations. We advocate strongly that the Scottish Government engages the third sector directly and early and makes specific efforts to reach those small to medium organisations. As part of its evidence, the charity law association explained that one of the joys of the Scottish charity system is that we have sometimes been slightly ahead of the game, but now we are slightly behind the curve. We hope that wider review helps to put Scotland back at the forefront. Before turning to the detail of the provisions, I want to emphasise that, although the committee supports the general principles, we received a clear message from the charitable sector that more information is required. The Scottish Government and OSCR must work together to ensure that the sector is provided with reassurance and support. One example of an area in need of clarification relates to the disqualification of potential trustees. It quickly became clear that there was significant confusion surrounding undischarged bankruptcy as a disqualification criterion. Several witnesses were specifically concerned that some individuals with relevant lived experience may be barred from becoming a trustee, even more so because the cost of living crisis could increase instances of bankruptcy. Although OSCR advised that personal bankruptcy is an existing criterion for disqualification, in place since the 2005 act, we felt that the regulator needed to clarify the position to the sector. It is concerning to the committee that it has not taken the introduction of this bill for the lack of awareness regarding this regulation to come to light. Now that new legislation is coming through, OSCR must ensure that all existing and new regulations governing charities are well understood by those who work in them. Full transparency and accountability in the sector can only be achieved if individuals working in it know what is expected of them. Although those potentially subject to disqualification can apply for a waiver, uncertainty around how the waiver process would work was also raised. A particular concern was default disqualification. It was thought that, as well as the waiver process being potentially off-putting to prospective trustees, it could disproportionately affect those from marginalised backgrounds. Charities deal with public money raised in good faith. It is imperative that this element of the legislation remains robust. However, organisations and potential trustees must have the information and support that they need to ensure that the waiver process is straightforward and that individuals are given the opportunity to be judged fairly. The Scottish Government and OSCR should ensure that the process is well understood and that any associated administration is straightforward. I thank the member very much for giving way. I was not on the committee, but I was interested to read the report. I think that the issue was raised with the Cabinet Secretary and one of her answers was that most of those bars are time limited. I just wondered if the committee was satisfied with that answer. I thank the member for that intervention. That is something that we could bring forward at stage 2. I believe that it is a 12-month period at the moment. Charities deal with public money raised in good faith. The appointment of interim trustees by OSCR also prompted questions. While the bill provides a regulator with the power to do that, evidence highlighted challenges in trustees' recruitment. We consider that it may not be easy for OSCR to find and appoint individuals willing to act on a temporary basis. Our report seeks further information on how OSCR expects to be able to recruit interim trustees and how often it anticipates this power being used. We would like to know, for example, if there would be a Scotland-wide panel of trustees to draw from. The final provision that I wish to discuss today relates to OSCR's ability to issue positive direction to charities following inquiries where concerns have been raised. While that was broadly supported, our evidence showed that the sector needs greater clarity about how that works in actual practice. For example, there was a spectrum of opinion regarding exemptions from positive directions for designated religious charities. The committee recommends that the Scottish Government covers this issue as part of the wider review. It was clear throughout our scrutiny that charities need more information about what will be expected of them, particularly on potential administrative and financial burdens. It is vitally important that any uncertainty is addressed. That is why we asked the Scottish Government to set out its plans for commencement of the bill in advance of any stage 2 consideration. To provide assurances, the expected timeframe will allow enough time for communication with organisations to help them prepare. The committee is pleased that the Scottish Government has since confirmed the expected timeframe in writing, and we thank the cabinet secretary for that. We also welcome the Scottish Government's recognition of the importance of communication with the sector. In conclusion, in order for charities to continue to add value, we must ensure that they are properly regulated and supported. While the committee is pleased that a wider review is forthcoming, we recognise the need for the Charities Regulation and Administration Scotland Bill to update important regulatory elements of existing legislation now. The committee therefore supports the general principles of the bill and commends them to the Scottish Parliament. Deputy Presiding Officer, I welcome the bill and confirm that those of us on this side of the chamber will be voting for it later today. I think that, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, this is a fairly non-controversial bill, and that is probably just as well. Since stage 1, we have had a new cabinet secretary, a new deputy convener and lost five members of the committee, so they have been controversial having no idea what would have happened. However, it is a welcome bill and I do hope that it will bring some clarity in regard to how charity law is developing. Like others, I thank those who gave evidence to the committee at stage 1 to the third sector and to other bodies interested in it. Like the cabinet secretary, we all acknowledge the importance of the third sector of charities in Scotland. Within our local communities, many of us see charities providing care and help to the most vulnerable and many of us are aware of the larger charities that work across Scotland. As someone who worked briefly in the third sector and has been a trustee of a number of charities, I know sometimes the difficulty it is to be able to recruit people into those positions to ensure that there is good governance. I hope that the bill or acting due course will help in regard to that. I suppose that what is most disappointing, if one can be critiqued slightly, is not what is in the bill but what is not in the bill. That was the clear evidence that came forward from particularly the third sector on the evidence that we heard. That was an opportunity perhaps to have a fairly wide range in review of charity law rather than a technical bill that we have before us today, but that has not happened. I think that there is disappointment in regard to that. I understand that the minister has said again today that there will be further consultation once this becomes an act, but I wonder if she could just put on record, as she closes, that there will be no bill within this Parliament, so any change within charity law would happen in the next session. Grateful to the member just to clarify, there is no intention for a further bill, so a piece of primary legislation is not possible, but of course there are a number, perhaps, of pieces of secondary legislation that could be changed, and that is something that I am happy to look at in the scope of the wider review. One of the things that came out again in the evidence was perhaps the clarification that the third sector needs on how charity law works. There seemed to be quite a lot of misunderstanding or concern that needs to be clarified. I think that there are some of how this will work in practice, which also needs to be clarified. I welcome the letter that we have already received from the cabinet secretary and I look forward to receiving the correspondence from Oscar. I would just point out gently both to Oscar and to the Scottish Government that we are working on quite a tight timescale in regard to stage 2 amendments. My understanding of what will happen early next month, which means that we will have to be lodged this month, and we are already halfway through this month. I hope that we will receive early correspondence from those bodies so that the appropriate discussions and amendments can be brought forward, which will seek to improve the bill. In the time that I just left with me, Deputy Presiding Officer, I can just pick up on three areas of the bill, but I think that we maybe need to have a look at in a wee bit more depth. The first is in regard to sections 4 and 7 of the bill. I am at least disqualification from being a trustee. Again, this was an area that there seems to be a wee bit lack of understanding of what it actually means in practice, and I do hope that Oscar will seek to clarify that as soon as possible. I think that, also, interestingly, the Law Society of Scotland picked up how the regulations that will follow on from any act will be vitally important of actually how that works in practice. Again, I am sure that the Scottish Government will, but I would seek to reassure, in fact, that there will be full consultation on those regulations with the third sector before we are brought forward to Parliament to approve. The other area that perhaps we just need to look at is around protected trustees, which some individuals use when they are facing bankruptcy. I understand that, if you declare bankrupt, that would only last for one calendar year, but for protected trustees, I think that there is a longer period and that we may see some people being disbarred from being a trustee for that longer period of time. One of the things that became very clear again in the evidence is that we need a wider group of individuals to become trustees. We need to see a wider range of other parts of society that perhaps have not done this in the past and disqualification may put people off in regard to that. The second area, just to probe a little round, is around section 8 of the bill on matters in regard to interim trustees. I suppose that the question is where will they come from. Certainly, the challenges that I speak to here within Lovian are desperate for people to become trustees, so, again, if there is some clarification on this, will there be a panel of individuals that the Scottish Government set up or Oscar set up that we can call upon with pleasure? I thank the member for giving way. I wonder if he thinks that maybe for some people they could not commit to a long term with a charity, but they might be willing to do a few months to help out. I think that that is an interesting concept. I would quite like to see it tested to see if that is right, but it certainly may well be something that we can look at. I think also in regard to how these individuals relate. I think that there is slight confusion, and perhaps it is my ignorance rather than anyone else's, in regard to what happens if a charity has an interim trustee appointed that they do not want. My reading of the bill is that there is no right of appeal in regard to that, and the only way forward would be for those trustees who maybe have not been functioning but are still around to take a judicial review. That would seem to be very expensive and take up a lot of resources and time. I wonder whether the Government could write to the committee to clarify why there is no right of appeal if you do not like the interim trustees that have been appointed. I think that that will be done on a fairly rare occasion, but when it does, it is probably because there has been some kind of conflict or something has gone wrong. The final way is to pick up a point made by my colleague Miles Briggs in regard to lifetime gifts and legacy section 12 of the bill. I am reading the Law Society Scotland's submission that if there is a lifetime gift, if I put a lifetime gift in my will and that charity merges with another charity, it would be for me who has written the will to have my will altered. If that did not happen, then money would not go to the new merged charity. That seems to be quite a lot of onus on people to keep up-to-date of what is happening in charity law. I welcome the cabinet secretary's remarks that she is going to look at this, but I think that we just need to get this a bit cleaner and a bit tighter in regard to stage 2 and stage 3. With those comments, I close by saying thank you. We welcome in again the bill before us, and I look forward to improving it over stage 2 and stage 3. Paul O'Kane, a generous six minutes please, Mr O'Kane. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I'm pleased to be leading this debate on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party. At the outset, I can refer members to my register of interests as I currently serve as the chair of trustees of Neilston War Memorial Association. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for their hard work in scrutinising this bill and indeed pay tribute to all the predecessor members. I think that Jeremy Balfour rightly recognised that there are many newbies, if you like, participating in this debate who have inherited this important piece of work, but nonetheless are very keen to make our contribution as the bill moves through its stages. Indeed, Pam Duncan Glancy, former member of the committee who I know worked very hard on this bill as it passed through committee in the stage 1 report process. From the outset, I want to be clear in stating that Scottish Labour does support the bill and believes that it is critically important that charities operate with transparency and accountability. We recognise that the bill will update Scottish charity legislation, aligning it with key tenants of regulations that govern charities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. However, in common with what we have heard from other opening speeches, it is evident that some of the aspects of the bill should be refined and clarified as the bill moves into stage 2 and stage 3. Indeed, we are looking particularly at how the new regulations will impact and interact with different charities in different ways. For example, it is critically important that we do not overburden charities with regulation to such a degree that it stifles their ability and limits their resources to perform their primary function of delivering support for the causes of the champion and for the causes that are supported widely by the public in a variety of ways. In terms of regulation, I think that it is important that at stage 2 there is greater focus, perhaps, placed on exploring the remit and resources of OSCA, the independent regulator and registrar of Scotland's charities, to ensure that there are proportionate increases that are required in funding to allow OSCA to carry out its responsibilities effectively. I appreciate that we have already had at the beginning of a discussion about that wider piece of work that requires to be done reviewing the charity sector in Scotland and the support that it is in. It is clear that the wider context is important, and I have already highlighted the significant financial pressures that are facing third sector organisations across Scotland. We know that the reality is that the majority of charities are small local organisations, with less than 10 per cent of registered charities in Scotland having more than 20 employees. Very often, those organisations are firmly rooted in their community and rely on the tireless generosity and passion of volunteers to deliver vital support for those who need it. Indeed, I mentioned last week in the chamber during my contribution to the debate on social isolation and loneliness that, in the context of the cost of living crisis, third sector organisations are being asked to deliver more with less resource. We need to recognise that, whether that is a technical bill, there is a wider debate here about the third sector as a vital national resource. Their expertise is unrivaled and the work that they do is invaluable. Government, as part of that wider review, will consider the continuing conversation about long-term funding, looking to move beyond that one year-to-year funding of the third sector, and looking at the availability of more core funding, and supporting representative bodies such as the Scottish Council for Volunteer Organisations to drive forward a lot of those changes and support charities to grow their capacity to be able to seamlessly move through with those changes. Our third sector needs greater stability rather than being limited by continuous cycles of short-term funding and interventions at different stages in relation to regulation. Indeed, during the consultation process for the bill, several third sector organisations highlighted that they were struggling to respond to the consultation simply because they did not have capacity to draft a meaningful response within the timescale, so that tells us a story about the picture for many charities. Indeed, only a tiny fraction of the 25,000 registered charities in Scotland submitted a response to the consultation. Throughout those responses, I think that we saw questions raised, which we have already heard articulated, about the impact of the legislation, particularly around perhaps the creation of a register of trustees. It has been highlighted by many charities and indeed by the fact of advocates that charities already struggle to recruit charity trustees with their requisite skills, passion and experience, and indeed the time commitment to give to charities. Although we see in the bill that prospective trustees will be able to apply to OSCA to preserve their anonymity, I think that, while protecting accountability and disparities of charities, it is important to recognise that, for many people, it creates additional barriers to actually becoming a trustee and engaging, particularly for people who perhaps are going through a period of rehabilitation, rebuilding their lives perhaps after criminal convictions or a prison sentence. I think that we have to be mindful of the balance between protecting charities and protecting the money that people donate to charities, but also to give everyone a fair crack of the whip and an opportunity to do that. I thank the member much for giving way. Will he accept that, from the point of view of trusting a charity, if I am a potential donor or I just want to find out about a charity, it is a bit strange when you look at the report and there are no names and no trustees whatsoever. I do take John Mason's point. I think that we have to find ways to share that information appropriately. Of course, the point that I am making here is that the danger is that we do not want to create too high a barrier for people who are going through that process of trying to improve and better their lives after a variety of situations. We need to strike the balance, because people want to have confidence. They want to know who is in control of the charity and who is governing the charity. I think that we just need to be quite careful about how we go about that and what the thresholds are for when someone can remain anonymous. I will draw those remarks to a close. I want to reiterate Scottish Labour's support for the bill. We want to call on the Government to adopt an open, positive approach and work with all parties to strengthen the bill, to iron out perhaps some of the concerns that have been raised by charities. Moreover, I urge the cabinet secretary to engage further with charities on that piece of work that she has committed to, really to ensure that the bill carries the confidence of the sector and that more widely we can have a conversation about how we strengthen and support charities across Scotland. Thank you, Mr Cain. We will now move to the open debate. I would advise members that there is quite a bit of time in hand should members be inclined to seek or take or make interventions or perhaps expand on their original thoughts on the matter. I call on Gordon MacDonald to be followed by Douglas Lambson. I will not continue speaking this slowly. I should highlight that I am one of the relatively new members of the committee that Jerry McBalfour referred to earlier, but I will also take this opportunity to commend the clerks and previous members of the committee who led on this piece of work and, of course, the stakeholders who provided invaluable evidence. The bill itself, introduced in November 22, has undergone two consultations that attracted over 400 written responses and aims to strengthen and update the current legislative framework for charities. It will do this by increasing transparency, for example, with the creation of a register of trustees and additional powers to the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, which includes being able to investigate charities and charity trustees. I support the general principles of the bill, which I believe will ensure robust regulation as well as improved openness, accountability and transparency for our charities. The charitable sector provides important and, in some cases, essential support across communities and to individuals from local scout groups to training providers to play groups. The reach is far and varied, with every community in Scotland having at least one of the 25,000 charities operating in Scotland. In my constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands, there are 263 registered charities, which many people in my area depend on for support. However, one in eight of those same charities fail to submit their annual return and are currently flagged as defaulting. Therefore, it is right that we look again at the legislation passed in 2005 to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Submissions to the consultation recognise that the charity sector has changed and grown significantly since 2005, with many citing the expectation from the public on charities having changed. In particular, organisations funded by local and national government agencies are subject to more checks and balances than ever before. A common theme among respondents was a need for greater transparency and accountability to maintain the public's trust in the sector. The pandemic had a profound impact on the sector, and I am certain that members across the chamber will all be too aware of the pressure on them throughout that time. Some of the respondents believed that the situation underlined a need for greater transparency, as well as a need for wider reform, given the huge changes that happened in response to the challenges posed by the pandemic. Evidence-submitted also highlighted a belief that the past three years following Covid-19 has seen more change in the sector than ever before, since the 2005 act was implemented. In addition, in the consultation process that has focused on potential improvements to the statutory charity regulation framework, there were calls for a more fundamental review of the charitable sector. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary indicated her intention to consult further with the sector on the following passage of the bill. In terms of the provisions that are set out in the bill, in general, they reflect, and I believe, strength in the proposals put forward by Oscar back in 2018. As I already indicated, the bill proposes giving Oscar wider powers to investigate charities and charity trustees, amending the rules on who can be a charity trustee or a senior officer in a charity, increasing the information that Oscar holds about charity trustees, updating the information that needs to be included on the Scottish Charity Register and creating a record of charities that have merged. It is clear from the majority of charitable organisations who responded that the proposed changes to the legislation is a welcome move by the Scottish Government. Overall, the evidence gathered agreed that the bill would lead to greater transparency in charity regulation. There were some concerns raised that the proposal would only be effective in increasing transparency and protecting the Scottish public if Oscar is appropriate or resourced and able to implement its new powers. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary has taken this into consideration and, given assurances that additional obligations while significant will not be too burdensome and will work with Oscar to ensure that they are supported. Of those that responded, many recognised that increasing Oscar's powers to investigate current and former charities, as well as broader coverage of the right to disqualify trustees, will have a positive impact on protecting the public. In addition, many respondents believed that strengthening Oscar's powers will act as a deterrent against maladministration, which will go some way in offering assurances to the general public about management of funds. A number of respondents supported the creation of a publicly searchable record of trustees, which they believed would increase transparency and protect the public against rogue trustees, who previously would be able to avoid scrutiny. Many smaller charities understandably have concerns on whether or not any changes to the legislation would result in additional costs to them, particularly when we are still in the throes of a cost of living increase, which undoubtedly has had a huge, significant impact on their ability to operate. I welcome the assurances from the Scottish Government that have set out the financial memorandum that, whilst the changes may result in some of the minister's time, there should not be any additional costs. I welcome the cabinet secretary's earlier commitment to review the regulation of Oscar in any future wider review of charitable law following the passage of the bill. That is fundamental and will go some way to ensure that charitable organisations are treated fairly in any dispute. I extend my thanks to the members and clerks of the committee for producing this report that is not only helpful but clearly shows the views of our third sector throughout its findings and recommendations. I think that we all agree that our third sector is the lifeblood of so many of our communities. They provide on-the-ground service that Governments struggle to provide. They meet the needs of residents that large-scale organisations have difficulties in tackling. Whether that is befriended programmes for the lonely, rehabilitations for those affected by addiction or warm hubs for those who are struggling with household bills, those small-scale local actions by our voluntary organisations are central to the wellbeing and community cohesion throughout Scotland. I want to take this opportunity to thank the incredible charities of the north-east—too many to name, but I could just highlight Camp Hill School Aberdein, Big Noise Tory and the Men's Shed Network—three fantastic charities working with young people and adults in the north-east who provide a vital service and resource in our community. They deserve our thanks and our support. Reform of charity legislation is long overdue, and I join with colleagues in welcoming this bill that we are considering today. It goes some way to developing a clearer framework for charities and their trustees in Scotland, encouraging the use of technology and building greater transparency into the system so that our third sector has greater accountability and access to support and help. I also welcome the consultation that took place with the third sector when drafting this legislation. It has been well thought through and the third sector has engaged widely. Although I note that only 12 of the 32 third sector interfaces responded to the consultation, I recognise that that was during the pandemic when many organisations had to place resources elsewhere. I support the committee's recommendation that the Scottish Government looks again at how it engages the third sector in the future and would ask that the cabinet secretary if he could bring forward a plan of how that may happen for future consultations. I note that many of the organisations that responded to the consultation did have concerns about the place of people with lived experiences as trustees under the new legislation and welcomed the committee's focus on that in their report. They clearly thought carefully about this issue and considered the implications on boards and recruiting trustees. The committee calls for much greater clarity on the disqualification criteria around bankruptcy and to ensure that the waiver process is well understood by the sector. This will clearly require some work by Oscar to ensure that this is placed once the legislation has been passed here and we heard that from the convener already. Presiding Officer, as anyone involved in charities in Scotland knows, recruitment of trustees is challenging. Finding the right people to do the right job is difficult and this has been particularly highlighted in more rural communities. It is important that this legislation does not dissuade anyone who is suitable for becoming a charity trustee and does not make the process cumbersome and therefore putting people off. More clarity is also needed around the interim trustee process and what that will mean in practice and I look forward to the committee considering this during the passage of the bill. There is clearly a great deal of concern among charities who responded to the consultation about the level of additional administrative burden that this will place on small charities. As we know, the majority of charities are small and most are wholly staffed by volunteers. It is vital that any additional administrative responsibilities does not negatively impact on their ability to deliver services within our communities. In the report, Alzheimer's Scotland makes an important point around the administrative and financial burden. Additional burden should not put off any volunteer treasurer or administrators for the charities. That is a key concern that needs to be addressed with clear guidance from the Government and the Government of Scotland, and IT solutions put in place that makes it easier for charities to report rather than harder. Although nuts included in the particular bill, it is also worth highlighting the section in Annex A of the report on the auditing threshold for charities. I understand that the level of income for charities in Scotland is slightly smaller, but I would ask the cabinet secretary again to listen to the calls from the third sector on this issue. I note one comment from the consultation held on 1 March from the summary note that states anecdotally that there is a lack of availability of auditors, which I am sure members of the SNP front bench would agree with and have some experience of recently. Finally, Presiding Officer, I support the principles of the bill and welcome the reform of the charity legislation. More clarity is needed in some areas, and I would echo the views of the third sector and its calls for clearer guidance in certain areas. I am genuinely pleased to see that the Scottish Government has listened to the concerns of the sector and has worked with it to develop the legislation. I hope that it can be a model for future legislation. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Charities play a vital role in supporting other communities, particularly those who are in greatest need. The pandemic and the cost of living crisis has continued to highlight just how vital the support charities provide truly is. I see this first hand with the terrific charities in my Clibank and Mogai constituency. I put on record my thanks to all the hard-working charities who support those in need and work to improve our communities. This bill is an important step that we must take to strengthen the third sector in Scotland. It has been 17 years since legislation concerning charity law in Scotland was passed, and it is important that we have listened to charities who have been calling for the Scottish Government to update and strengthen current regulations. It is right that, as a starting point for updating the legislation, the bill is centred on the practical proposals put forward by the Office of the Scottish Charities Regulator. Scotland's charities raise over £14 billion each year, so it is essential that they are properly regulated. Charities cannot exist without the support of generous donors. We know that those donors are more likely to support charities when they are confident that those in charge are the right people to ensure that their money is being used responsibly. At the core of it, charities are about trust. When individuals become involved with the charity, they are giving more than just their time and money, and they deserve to know that those managing their donations and running the charity can be trusted to act in its best interest. The bill will ensure that the public can trust the charities most important to them by enhancing transparency and accountability across the sector. Oscar already does vital work overseeing the third sector in Scotland. He grants charitable status, monitors compliance, investigates misconduct, and much, much more. Currently, it is clear that they do not have the powers to fulfil their core aim of ensuring transparency. With the ability to issue positive directions, publish annual financial accounts for every charity, appoint interim trustees where required for a maximum of 12 months and ensure that individuals disqualified as trustees are known and unable to work in other senior management roles. The bill will ensure that Oscar has met the enforcement powers that need to make their core aim of increasing transparency in the sector. Often, charities are benefited from their trustees being those who have lived the experience of a specific issue. I am very conscious that there will be certain areas where, due to their nature, such as victim support organisations, trustees must be afforded anonymity. Therefore, as was concluded by the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I am glad that the provisions of the bill strike a good balance between greater transparency while also providing avenues to protect the identity of trustees where necessary. What is most important about the proposals in the bill is that they in no way impact a charity's ability to support those in need. No decisions we make here will see any charity have any have to sacrifice front-line resources. Over half of all charitable organisations in Scotland have an annual income of under 25,000. It would not take much additional regularity burden to see the vital work that those smaller charities do significantly hampered. With that in mind, I am pleased that the analyses conducted by the Scottish Government found that charities themselves are supportive of the proposals included in the bill and do not foresee any other than the minor costs, a finding that was also supported by the Citizens Advice Scotland. It is important that we also acknowledge the views of the experts who consulted on the bill. The Law Society of Scotland stated that those proposals are sensible and proportionate and that the register of trustees' names will directly increase transparency. The chair of Oscar believed that the bill will increase public trust in Scotland's 25,000 charities. Citizens Advice Scotland highlighted that this bill will help to improve public confidence in the third sector and ensure that the benefits charities provide society are maximised. It is clear to me that there is widespread support for those proposals from those who will be impacted the most. I believe that the bill is an important step that we must take to support the third sector. Charities will only continue to receive the donations that they urgently require if donors have full confidence that their donations are going to support those who need it most. The improvements that the bill makes to transparency in the sector will go a long way to ensure that donors continue to have confidence in the charities that they choose to support. It is clear from the consultation that further work will be required as we continue to strengthen the Scottish charity sector. However, I am firmly supportive of the bill, and I believe that it provides the best possible framework to begin comprehensively improving charity regulation in Scotland. Before I begin, I declare my interest as chair of the Edinburgh and Lothian regional equality council. The Charities Regulation and Administration Scotland Bill aims to update the current charity law in Scotland, and Scottish Labour welcomes a much-needed update. As many of my colleagues have already mentioned, the bill will pass more power into the hands of the Scottish Charity regulator, Oscar. It will hold charities more accountable for the appointment of trustees and the publication of accounts. It also increases transparency and accountability in charities by increasing public access to information about the daily running of the charity. These are, of course, welcome improvements, but a more in-depth review is still required. As part of my role on the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I highlighted these issues, and then the Cabinet Secretary, Shona Robinson, outlined that the implementation of this bill would help to guide a wider review of the charity sector in general. I hope that this continues to be the case. Of course, there are some key issues I would like to highlight with this bill. The first is the concern that the consultation and engagement process did not go far enough. Many thought the engagement process was not well advertised. Both Zero Tolerance Scotland and the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre were examples of the organisation that did not have the capacity to interact with the consultation process in 2019 and 2021. They have expressed the view that the latest and final consultation process was not advertised well enough for them to participate. As well as this, smaller charities and organisations were not given a representative opportunity to contribute to the call for views. I chair the Edinburgh and Lothian Regional Quality Council, and I can confirm that ALREC were not made aware of any opportunity to participate in such consultations. The Scottish Orman Convention and the Children's Hospice Association Scotland also expressed concern about the publicity around the engagement events. They expressed that it was not wide-reaching enough, and not all third sector organisations had the opportunity to express their concern and feedback. Some charities also felt that they have not had the chance to fully contribute to the bill and that the development has been skewed towards the views of the Oscar. I sincerely hope that the wider review of the charity sector that the Cabinet Secretary promised will seek to avoid this issue in the future. With regards to smaller third sector organisations, I have been made aware that there are some concerns about some of the provisions of the bill, specifically with regards to the provision on the publication of accounts and implementation of register of trustees. Of course, we welcome the transparency and accountability that this will bring, but there is concern about if this will proportionally affect smaller third sector organisations. Foundation Scotland expressed concern that the administrative burden placed on the charities due to the new provision may feel disproportionate for smaller charities. The Institute of Chartered Accounts Scotland expressed that smaller charities and third sector organisations are also likely to feel daunted about the implementation of a register of trustees. This is both in terms of complying with the requirements and securing disclosure exemptions on grounds of safety and security. If this implementation of this bill does not look like a greater burden to smaller charities, one that were largely left out of the consultation process, then I hope an adjustment period can be introduced to assist the affected organisations. However, first and foremost, I hope that the Scottish Government will be able to provide assurance going forward that this bill will not disproportionately affect smaller third sector organisations. I appreciate the opportunity to take part today. As members will know, I have not been a member of the committee either previously or currently dealing with the bill, so I have not been involved in taking evidence or preparing the report. However, perhaps that has some advantages in that I come to it without a lot of preconceived notions. I am currently a trustee of one charity, which is fair share trust, but I have been involved in a variety of ones over the years. Starting with what is actually in the bill, whether or not trustees' names should be in the public domain has clearly been considered by the committee at some length. It is argued that it will increase transparency and accountability. Although I note that there has been some concern about that, including from the faculty of advocates, I fully accept that there needs to be some right of privacy, so I would agree that, for example, home addresses should not be shown. However, the right to privacy, it seems to me, surely has to have some limits and be balanced against other rights and public expectations. In preparation for today's debate, my staff and I were looking at the published reports and accounts of a few Glasgow charities. For example, one charity, which I have had some concerns about, I have to say, had all the trustee names redacted. Apart from the fact that I think that that looks very odd in comparison to, say, a business or housing association report, it does give myself or any member of the public a real problem. One of the reassurances that a concerned person or a potential donor can have when looking at a charity is to see the names of the trustees and to gain reassurance that they are known to some extent and trustworthy. Becoming a charity trustee is not to be taken lightly and carries certain responsibilities with it, therefore I do very much believe that it is important that trustee names are published except in very exceptional circumstances. Moving on to the issue of disqualifying trustees because of bankruptcy, presumably neither charities themselves nor potential donors nor the wider public want trustees to be managing charity finances if they cannot manage their own personal finances. At the same time, the point is correctly made that we do want people with lived experience who can bring practical reality to the way a charity operates. Once again, there is a balance to be struck. I assume that the previous cabinet secretary's answer was helpful in that many of the disqualifications are time limited. If someone has made a mistake in the past, or if they have got into financial trouble through no fault of their own, then they must be given the opportunity to turn their lives around and get another chance, but it does no harm to have a bit of breathing space in that process. Another point that is made is that someone can have a huge input to a charity without actually being a trustee. Being a trustee is a responsibility, it is not a reward, and as Oscar says, public trust and confidence is very important. There are a range of other issues that I will mention in passing. I note that the cabinet secretary made the point that she felt that all trustees should be treated in the same way. However, I wonder whether that is the case. A trustee for a charity with income of, say, £25,000 surely does not carry the same level of responsibility as the trustee for a charity with income of £25 million. On interim and temporary trustees, I think that some people might be willing to take on such a role just because it was time limited, and they would not be making such a long-term commitment if they took on being a trustee in normal circumstances. I would have to say that I personally might consider an interim role, whereas I would not consider a long-term one, but that is not an invitation for people to contact me. I have to say that one point that I did not really understand was that information in the accounts could be used maliciously against the charities, and I was not really clear what the committee meant by that. Availability of auditors or the lack of them was raised by ICAS, of which I should say that I am a member. With so many charities being under £25,000, it is worth considering if any checks are really needed on that at all, whereas independent examination is clearly an important alternative for medium-sized charities. Clearly, it seems to me that the risk of misappropriation increases with income, and I would have reservations if the threshold for an audit was raised from £0.5 million to £1 million, as ICAS suggests. A lot can go wrong with an income of £0.5 million, and I think that it is the risk factor that should be decisive in that question. Moving on to what is not in the bill, I did say in my own brief submission to the consultation that I considered that we need a more fundamental review of charity law, and I am glad to see that a number of other organisations said the same, including the Law Society of Scotland, and the committee's report touches on that. It seems to me that we have at least three different types of charities at the moment in Scotland, and they are all very different from each other. There is the small local charity, which is working in the local community, or perhaps raising funds for our school overseas, and it is run entirely by volunteers. Then there are much larger charities who are also doing that same kind of work, but with a large number of staff and possibly Government funding, and we think of charities such as Oxfam, Bernardo's and SSPCA in that category. Again, there are other big organisations such as Glasgow Life, housing associations, universities and so on, which are probably not charities in the traditional sense of the word. I have no problem with any of those bodies getting tax breaks, as they do, which I think is one of the incentives for being a charity. They do certainly fulfil charitable purposes. In Glasgow Life's case, I think that they claim to fulfil seven of the purposes for being a charity. However, I still wonder if we should really be calling something like Glasgow Life a charity. I think that that is a bit misleading in the use of the word, and I feel that it dilutes the positive feeling that many people have around charities, and maybe we need to look in the long term at new definitions of the word. In closing, I am very happy to support the bill at stage 1, and I hope that the bill will be followed by more wide-ranging legislation in the future. I thank you very much, Mr Mason. I now call Maggie Chapman, who joins us remotely, to be followed by Pam Duncan-Glancy, around six minutes. I am pleased to contribute to the debate today in support of the general principles of this bill on behalf of the Scottish Greens, and I refer members to my register of interests. I was previously employed in different roles within the charitable sector, and I am a member of some others. Charities, the third sector, play a vital role in our communities. They often support us at some of the most difficult or challenging times in our lives. They provide crucial, sometimes life-saving services for us as individuals, families and whole communities. They advocate on our behalf when we cannot or might not be able to speak for ourselves. They provide constructive challenge and critique for all levels of government on policy direction and decisions. They build resilience and provide protections across all our communities. Their hard work often goes unseen and, sadly, often undervalued to. Our society would not function without those services and supports, and the often selfless work that so many contribute to our collective wellbeing. It is therefore vital that the regulatory framework within which charities operate is up to date and serves both the charities and wider society as well as possible. As we have already heard this afternoon, charity law in Scotland has not been significantly amended since the Charities and Trusty Investment Act 2005 was enacted. The bill that we debate today aims to update the current system of charity regulation by improving transparency and accountability, enhancing public trust by providing greater protection for charity assets and the charity brand through stronger enforcement powers, and improving the efficiency of Oscars operations. If passed, as the Cabinet Secretary has outlined, this technical bill will make a number of amendments to that 2005 act. It seeks to give Oscar, the charity regulator, wider powers to investigate charities and charity trustees. It amends the rules on who can be a trustee or a senior office holder in a charity, vital roles that must be properly supported. It increases the information that Oscar holds about charity trustees. It also updates the information that is required to be included on the Scottish Charity Register and to create a record of charities that have merged. Importantly, all of this seeks to make charities more accountable and transparent in their governance and operational arrangements. I am very grateful to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for its detailed scrutiny of the bill over recent months and its stage 1 report published last month. As someone who does not sit on that committee, I found this report very helpful to better understand the issues covered in this technical legislation. Others have already highlighted specific issues or areas of concern, but I just want to reinforce the calls made on the Scottish Government for early and direct engagement with the breadth of the charity sector, not only over the coming stages of this bill, but for any and all future reviews of charity law in Scotland. Similarly, we should all share the responsibility for the provision of clear information to ensure that the sector as a whole is aware of the provisions in the bill and that there is shared understanding of the implications of the legislation for charities and regulators alike. The bill is clearly not intended to be a complete review or reform of charity law, but rather to enhance the measures that already exist. However, the various consultations that have led us to today, particularly what the Social Justice and Social Security Committee heard, are clear. A more comprehensive review of the 2005 legislation is required, and I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for his statements of intent around the wider reviews. Because, as others have said, there are things that this bill does not do, which we would like to see considered. Specifically, Greens would like to see charitable concessions for activities that are goods in and of themselves, such as the generation of zero-carbon energy. In the same way as poverty alleviation or supporting vulnerable people are seen as legitimate and laudable charitable purposes. Charities should not have to go through the bureaucratic process of setting up trading subsidiaries just to do good. We would also like to see the explicit inclusion of each of the protected characteristics currently covered in the Equality Act into charity law. Religion is obviously already covered, and rightly so, but we consider there to be benefit to ensuring that all protected characteristics are treated similarly in charity legislation. However, I appreciate these are substantial proposals, and along with many of the other issues raised by other groups and organisations, some of which have already been highlighted this afternoon, these would all be better considered as part of that wider review already planned for future years. In closing, Presiding Officer, I would like to thank all those charities, individuals and other agencies and groups who have contributed to the consultations and committee evidence sessions so far. This input is invaluable to our scrutiny of any legislation, but perhaps it is especially important when dealing with such technical legislation about organisations and the sector that supports so much of our lives. I know that there is still work to do, and I look forward to following the progress of the bill through the forthcoming stages. Charities and third sector organisations work tirelessly to deliver for communities right across Scotland. They deliver services, develop policies, provide volunteering and paid work, contribute hugely to the economy, and even provide food, shelter and financial support direct to people in all of our constituencies. Without them, many people across Scotland and in the Glasgow region would be left isolated in poverty alone and without the essential care and support that they need. I would like to put on record just now my thanks to all the third sector organisations and the people working in them up and down our country today. That is why I and my party welcome this bill, which aims to bring regulation in the sector up to date and in line with other areas of the UK. For the most part, it does so, but I want to use my contribution today to highlight some areas where we need the Government to be a bit clearer and to act, and I want to reinforce the importance of supporting and resourcing the third sector organisations to make sure that they are not left to implement changes on their own. One of the key areas, I think, is communication. Communicating the changes the bill makes will be key for the vast number of third sector organisations, and the Government must be prepared to take a full and active role in that. It cannot leave the already stretched sector to do it themselves. We heard evidence in committee, and I would like to thank everyone who gave evidence to us on this, from counterparts across the UK, of the importance of not underestimating the scale of communication needed, and I hope that the Government will take on board their advice from experience as it progresses. Clarity will be important too, particularly around the categories of people who can and can't be trustees or senior members of charity staff. Recruitment is tough, and the committee heard that loud and clear, and we have heard in this chamber the same this afternoon. So whatever processes are put in place to ensure due diligence, which is crucial, also must be clear on processes to waive the obstruction to taking up those posts. For some people, being involved in charity work can turn their life around, that is why I am keen to hear what specifically the Government can do to ensure the impact of the rules on who can and can't be involved at those levels, is proportionate, promoted and understood, and does not undermine efforts to recruit or efforts on equality. The committee heard that this bill is welcome, but that it is also largely Oscar's bill. It told us that the current regulatory landscape is broader than this, and in some ways is cluttered, and that the Government did not engage widely enough across the third sector to get that wider perspective early enough. For those reasons, I am pleased that the Government has committed to a wider review of charity law and regulation going forward. It is crucial that that review is independent, carried out with the third sector and that it is supported to participate in it, not expected to carry out the engagement on its own. Because the sector really is struggling, they are still waiting for multi-year funding and with it the certainty and ability to plan for future years. Significant numbers of organisations fear that they could close volunteers and staff are stretched, but, regardless, they are still powering on, and they are still acting as the last line of defence for the people of the state, some cannot help. The sector needs that certainty of funding, and they need to know that they will have the support and resources that they need to engage in the implementation of this bill and the development of an independent review. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the sector, volunteers and staff again for all that they do, including those in the Glasgow region, organisations such as Patec Thistle Community Trust, whose invaluable impact on their community I have seen firsthand and praised in this chamber, such as Healthy and Happy in Ruthergwyn, whose support and encouragement are community to flourish, such as Glasgow Disability Alliance, who advocates tirelessly for the rights of disabled people, and like GROW73, which brings Rugglonians together to make a positive impact on the environment and transform the local community whilst building friendship in the process. Of course, I want to pay tribute to the work of SCVO, whose support and promotion of the sector enables it to develop and grow, and who never stops driving to push voluntary organisations to reach their full potential. I am very grateful to my colleague for taking the intervention. She is speaking about SCVO, and I think that it is crucial that in any process of moving forward and looking at reform of the sector, SCVO is a strong, strong partner, and it will certainly take a leadership role in that because of its extensive work in representing charities across Scotland of different size and scale. Will the cabinet secretary agree that, when the cabinet secretary brings forward a plan around the next stage of engaging with charities, SCVO very much needs to be at the heart of that? I thank my colleague and member for that intervention, and I wholeheartedly agree. My hesitancy was not to take the intervention at that point, but to wonder whether I was able to do so in the last seconds of my speech. I thank the member for that intervention. SCVO's support and promotion of the sector enables it to develop and grow and support people. They never stop driving to push voluntary organisations to reach their full potential, so I hope that they will be involved in that further review, as my colleague does. The work is invaluable, and we should do all that we can to support them and the rest of the sector. You are so kind, Presiding Officer. Thank you for that. As Pam Duncan-Glancy eloquently has said, we all owe a debt to those who give their time freely, generously and copiously to support charitable effort throughout the country. Indeed, Scotland would not be what it is without the effort of those individuals. I also add my own thanks to Oscar, to the charities, to the people who work in Oscar. I had the privilege of being the minister with oversight responsibility between 2011 and 2016, and I particularly enjoyed working with the very reverent Graham Forbes, who chaired Oscar for eight years from 2011. Today's debate is about the regulation of charities, and regulation of charities is absolutely necessary. We have heard reasons for that. John Mason has made a number of telling points about this incidentally. John Mason was right to say that the audit limit should not be increased to £1 million. He is absolutely spot on with that. It is about regulation of charities, and we must be mindful when we create regulations in this place that we only do so when they are necessary. They comply with certain overriding public policy objectives. Those are set out in the regulatory review group, the Scottish Government's body, which has policy responsibility for looking at regulation. As I recall from memory, those are that regulations should be proportionate, they should not be unduly burdensome, and they should not result in excessive costs in terms of compliance, taking account of the size, scale of charity and so on and so forth. Those are sensible, desirable principles to which I think we should all comply and of which we should be mindful. I want to talk about one particular regulatory impost, which we would really do well to look again at. Before I come to that, recently, of course, the First Minister held a poverty summit, in which he reaffirms the objective of tackling and eradicating poverty in Scotland. That was welcome and heartfelt and absolutely paramount importance of what we are doing in this place. I do not think that many people, whatever party we are in, would demur from that point of view. We also know that charities play an absolutely pivotal role in helping to alleviate poverty in a whole host of ways across Scotland. That is something that people are passionate about and motivates them as volunteers in charities. Perhaps the bulwark of that charitable effort I think rises in our churches. Our churches, certainly in my constituency, are behind a huge amount of the voluntary effort that goes on in trying to help people who most need help. Whether it is the Church of Scotland members whom I have met at food banks who volunteer for their time every week to go along to help out those people, whether it is simply organising coffee mornings, raffles events for the benefit of people who need that help most, whether it is the Salvation Army whose work is truly magnificent in helping men who have perhaps lost their way in life. The churches are behind so many things. All of the churches are not talking just about the Church of Scotland, which I remember, but all churches all face. Across Scotland, that effort is terrific. There is one piece of regulation, not in this bill, which I broadly welcome, but in another piece of legislation that also regulates charities, which is the register of persons holding a controlled interest in land regulations 2021. Those regulations were set up to pursue land reform policy objectives principally, so that those landed estates held in trust or by limited companies are often secretive in the sense that people living in those parts of Scotland do not know who the owners are. That creates a number of very practical problems, and I think that that is the aim of the legislation, although I was not involved in it. However, it was never intended that, for example, in the case of the Church of Scotland, which has 6,000 properties, the names of every official in every congregation, in every church in Scotland have to be entered on this register. In what sense is there a public interest that this information requires to be disclosed? Moreover, presumably, as office bearers change as they do on a very frequent basis for all sorts of obvious reasons, that register then has to be updated. With a whole ream of information that nobody is interested in, it is not in the public interest that it is not required. Indeed, in one of the sections of the bill, as the cabinet secretary pointed out at the beginning, there is a duty to provide details of the trustees. I think that Mr Mason referred to that, as well as the cabinet secretary. Yes, I will certainly take an intervention. Jeremy Balfour is grateful for taking an intervention. He also agreed with me that the people who are trustees for these properties are the congregation that controls them. They are simply names on a piece of paper. They themselves cannot dispose of a property without the congregation's approval. Absolutly a spot on relevant point that Mr Balfour makes. I entirely agree with that. Why am I mentioning this? I am mentioning it because of this. At the moment, much of the money that churches raise goes to alleviate poverty, but the Church of Scotland, in the letter that I imagine other MSPs have received and they sent us in January this year, pointed out that having to provide all that information for 6,000 properties will involve them in legal and administration costs of hundreds of thousands of pounds. Where is that money coming from? It is going to come from money that would otherwise continue to go to alleviate poverty and to help the poorest people in the country. This has been raised with the Minister for Land Reform, Mary McCall, and I think now Marie Gougeon's responsibility. I appreciate that the cabinet secretary does not have her own responsibility for this matter. I raise it because it is part of the overarching regulation of charities. It is not in this bill before us, but it needs to be looked at again. I personally think that churches should be exempted because there is no land reform interest whatsoever. That could be done possibly by amendment of this bill or perhaps by secondary legislation. It is probably more appropriate, but I raise it, and I take this opportunity to raise it. I raise it in doing so—sorry, I did not see the number, yes. I am very grateful to Fergus Ewing for taking intervention, and I think that he is making a very important point, which is related to the wider regulation of charities. Indeed, my inbox has been filled with members of sessions from across churches in Scotland who are very concerned about this. Would he recognise that there might be an opportunity, given the general assembly, if the Church of Scotland will meet from the 25th of May for the minister to perhaps re-engage with the general assembly and the general trustees of the Church of Scotland to try and find some kind of way forward? Fergus Ewing. I know that ministers have met the church and made lots of efforts. Thus far, they have ruled out exempting churches. I think that that is justified, and I think that the reasons for doing so, I am afraid, do not stand up the water. I can understand ministers' reluctance to amend regulations that have only recently been passed, but, nonetheless, I hope that I have made the argument. In closing, having had this lavish generosity from your good self, in closing, if I have made the case so that members across the party—it is not a political point in any way whatsoever—if other members feel that I have made this point in a reasonable fashion today and that this is something that should be reopened, then, as I am trying to do in many issues, I would be very happy to work across the party with other members to try to bring about a change that would achieve the First Minister's aim of helping, in a small way, to tackle poverty and continue to do so. In a small way, hundreds of thousands of pounds can do a lot to help a few people, and, as they used to say, Monea Mikkel max a muckle. I thank Mr Ewing for being justice to my lavish generosity, which I now bestow upon Paul O'Kane to close for, again, a generous six minutes. I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer, to you for indeed your lavish generosity, and I will attempt to justify that lavish generosity by my closing speech. I think that we have had an important debate this afternoon in which we have heard a broad consensus here in the Parliament for the general principles of this bill. As the cabinet secretary outlined in her opening, it is, of course, a technical bill. As a bill, I think that we are agreed to in terms of trying to tidy up the legislation, to make it stronger and to ensure that the public have confidence in charities across Scotland and, indeed, to ensure that Scotland is in line with England, Wales and Northern Ireland. What we have heard across the pieces is that, in the further stages of this bill, there will be the requirement for refinement and clarity on a number of points that were raised by members across the chamber today. Collette Stevenson, in her new role as convener, to which I welcome her, made important contributions on behalf of the committee, pointing out that the wider review that the cabinet secretary has committed to will be important in terms of trying to engage with the third sector on not just those issues but wider issues that it has raised with the committee. I thought that she made an excellent point in terms of that we need to start that engagement early and ensure that the third sector is approached from the very beginning. Smaller charities have been included in that. We have heard a lot today about the charities that many members know from their own parts of Scotland. It is important that they have a strong voice in everything that we do, because they are the people who make the change in communities. Again, the importance of those charities was highlighted by Jeremy Balfour in his opening speech. I thought that he made an excellent point about good governance, being crucial to the functioning of charities. Like many others, he highlighted that greater support is required and that the stability of charities is required in order to make sure that they can meet their obligations and can continue to serve the communities so well. In terms of charities serving communities and the particular challenges that I think exist for charities, Douglas Lumsden's point about the challenge of recruiting trustees was important. I think that, particularly his point about rural communities, many members across the chamber represent rural communities. We know that charitable organisations in small towns and villages are often the lifeblood of everything that goes on in those communities. They are often long-standing historical institutions. It can be hard in a modern context to get people enthused to take on the roles of being a trustee, of dealing with the finance and operation of the charity, particularly in smaller communities. I think that we have to have our eyes open to that challenge and to make sure that we are not putting unnecessary barriers in place for people who may want to become trustees. As I said in my opening, it is about striking a balance between transparency and making sure that there is public confidence. I think that ensuring that we do not make regulation over cumbersome and putting people off who may otherwise want to become engaged. John Mason, again, made important points in this space. Indeed, our exchange in his intervention, I think, was important about trying to find that balance. I thought that his points about interim and temporary trustees were important, because very often charities need perhaps a bit of bridging support, if you like. There are people who may have professional expertise who are willing to do that, but do not often feel that they have the confidence or the legal wherewithal to be able to do that. I also think that John Mason made an important point in terms of the wider regulation of charities in terms of reporting. I thought his point about charities under £25,000. Do we need to look again at how they report into Oscar and the level of scrutiny of their accounts? I think that that is an important point. I think that, hopefully, in part of the wider conversation that we have, we can look at some of those issues as well. Communication, Presiding Officer, was raised as an issue. I think that both communication of the consultation. I mentioned in my opening that many charities felt unable to contribute to the committee's consultation because of the lack of capacity. Foysal Childry highlighted that many charities just were not aware and had not heard that there was a consultation on going. I hope that the Government will reflect on that. Pam Duncan Glancy made an excellent point that communication of the changes when the bill eventually clears its parliamentary process will be vital to make sure that everybody knows what is expected of them and what they need to do. Communication is a key point that we need to look at as a Parliament. I hope that the Government will want to reflect on that when it comes back to the chamber. As I have said, the Scottish Labour Party supports the principles of the bill. We all want to see charities in Scotland that are well-governed and transparent and that people can have trust in. We want to ensure that when people donate to charity, they do so with confidence. We want to know that when they volunteer for a charity, they do that knowing that the charity is reputable. There are wider points that have been brought out in the debate, which really talk about the health of the third sector in Scotland. Clearly, there are a multitude of challenges, not least recovery from the pandemic, the cost of living pressures, the demand for services and a longer-term lack of strategy to fund and support charities, particularly things such as three-year funding cycles, which we have talked about for a long time in this Parliament and have not been delivered. I think that we need to look at all of that in the round and make sure that we are supporting charities. I thought that Fergus Ewing's point about some of the wider issues that affect faith-based charities on our churches. We cannot get away from the fact that other pieces of legislation are interacting here, and we need to take a look at that. Across the chamber, there is a cross-party concern about some of those issues that he raised. I am certainly happy to have a further conversation with him, as I am sure that others are. I am now going over the score on your generosity, so I do not want to fall foul of the chair. In concluding, I think that there is a real willingness on behalf of certainly this side of the chamber to work with the Government to get the bill right, to make sure that it does what it sets out to do and to make sure that we take people with us in the charity sector across Scotland. We look forward to that wider piece of work that the cabinet secretary has committed to. Thank you very much, Mr O'Kane. I am not sure that you are entirely reading my body language, but nevertheless, I now call Miles Briggs, again, a generous seven minutes. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I start by declaring interest as the chair for the Heart of Scotland Heart Research UK appeal board here in Scotland. As others have done, I thank our clerks and those who have given evidence to the committee as well. I thank the charities and organisations across Scotland for the work that they do in our communities. From my outset, as we have heard from other members, nothing that the bill brings, I hope, will impact on that. That is something that we really wanted to make sure, especially smaller charities across the country. It is worth reflecting that my colleague Jeremy Balfour and I are the only two members who took evidence on the bill. We are the only two original members of the committee. Conservative said that we would be strong and stable, so we are definitely demonstrating that in this Parliament today. However, there are a number of issues that I wanted to raise with regard to the bill. It is important, because, as other members have mentioned, Scottish charities have a combined income of more than £15 billion in Scotland to employ 200,000 people. It is important that they operate in a regulatory framework that safeguards that funding and those jobs. Looking towards what we are doing today and with this bill, charity law, which we are operating under, has been in place for 17 years. It has been necessary to modernise how that operates and to provide more transparency. I think that none of us would agree or disagree with that. There are very sensible things within the bill that allow for provision of information around trustees, updating law in relation to disqualification criteria, allowing the appointment of emergency charity trustees. That is an issue that I pursued in committee and I still want to see more clarification on with regard to who those individuals will be, whether or not there will be a Scotland-wide group of individuals. I think that we still need to have more clarification of that. We can seek that at stage 2, but that is something that I still want to see Parliament and ministers pursue. That has been touched on previously in the intervention to the Cabinet Secretary. I am concerned with the lifetime gifts and charity mergers. I think that in the future we will potentially see fewer charities not necessarily because of this bill but because of future changes and where the direction of travel is. Part of my concern is that we are seeing at this moment in time many people very generously giving lifetime gifts in their wills, but what happens to those if a charity is merged? I do not think that necessarily inheritance law has been taken into account with this. It is something at stage 2. Again, I would like to see more clarification from Government, because I think that we need to make sure that that is not something that we particularly burden other charities with. As a number of members have stated in this debate, that is very important. Douglas Lumsden, Paul O'Kane and Faisal Chowdry made the point that the bill must not become over burdensome on charities, especially small charities that are just fully volunteer-led. A reason why many of those charities have not been engaged in the process, they might not have been aware of it or would not have the capacity to input into the Parliament and the Government's consultation. We need to take on board as well. In particular, the bill requires charities to have a connection to Scotland. That is something that I asked the committee about in the definition of. I think that we have necessarily worked out a charity that is not registered as a charity in Scotland, but maybe a UK-wide charity that is just undertaking research, for example, in Scotland. What impact would that have? Unintended consequences and John Mason and Fergus Ewing have pointed towards that. It is something that we need to be very mindful of within this bill as it moves forward. John Mason made some interesting points, maybe not for this bill, but for future consultations and reforms. It seemed very unfair that a charity operating in Scotland with an income of less than £25,000 could be a church hall anywhere in Scotland under the same regulation. I do think that that is something to look at. I do not know whether or not that is an income threshold, whether or not it is an employment threshold, because there are obviously different criteria and costs around administration. However, I do think that that is something that we have not had an opportunity to input into this. It is probably not something that the Government would open up at stage 2, but it is something that we need to be mindful of. Whether or not we can have different criteria for that is something that I was keen to pursue. I hope that there is a cross-party consensus on taking that forward in the next Parliament. I believe that the Government did state that they might consult before the end of this Parliament on what that would look like, so I think that there is an opportunity there for us to do that. The final point that I wanted to make was with regard to the recruitment of interim trustees. As I have stated, I do not think that, necessarily, and I know that the Government has written to the committee that we discussed this morning about clarification of who those individuals would be. I think that that is really important and that the appeals process is attached to that for individuals who might not be suitable. It is something that I hope we have an opportunity to have further clarification at stage 2, which is coming very quickly down the line. Finally, I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate and also to the work of the committee. If there is one thing that I think that we have heard loud and clear as a committee, it is how charities want to make sure that every single penny that they raise is going to the front line of the causes that they are trying to advance in Scotland. I certainly have been clear in our work on the committee that we did not want this to be in any way burdensome on them. I take the point and have reached out to Church of Scotland as well with the points that Fergus Ewing raised. We need to look again at that and the registration. I know that other charities have also made the point in terms of privacy and charities who are operating in very different circumstances where that is fully understandable. Scottish Conservatives will be supporting the bill as proposed at stage 1. As the new convener, Collette Stevenson, has stated that there is the support of the general principles of the bill. We now need to see ministers provide detailed answers for the sector and then collectively I think that this is a bill at which Parliament can approve going forward. I call on Shirley-Anne Somerville to wind up. I thank members from across the chamber for the constructive spirit that today's debate has been carried out in and I look forward to working with them as we work towards stage 2 and further deliberations. I am also pleased to welcome Collette Stevenson to her new role as committee convener. I look forward to working with her and indeed the experienced and also new members of the committee. I was going to say old there and I thought no. The experienced members of the committee and those who have joined, but I have been able to support my preparations for the debate to be by my two junior ministers who were on the committee and did hear all the evidence in front of you. Today has been a really important chance for all of us to reflect on the importance of charities and the important roles that trustees play. I have been a trustee in the past, ironically enough, given my current portfolio. I used to be a trustee for Shelter, which they have reminded me of carefully since I have taken on my role in social justice, but certainly on my time I absolutely did recognise the really important role that a trustee can play in a charity. That is one of the reasons why this bill is so important. Yes, it is quite technical and we have been through some of that today, but it is about ensuring that we have the best possible conditions for the charity sector to thrive and to strengthen in our communities. The public support of charities is strong, the public trust is strong and we need to make sure that that continues. It is very important that we reflect on the sheer breadth and depth of the charity sector that we have here in Scotland. There have been a number of contributions today, which are not technically to do with what is in the bill, but are very, very important. They, I hope, can be some of the aspects if people wish that we want to take forward in the wider review of the framework for charities. That was very clear again during the consultations and the discussions with stakeholders as well. They support the principles behind this bill, but they are keen for more to be done. That is exactly why, as I said in my original remarks, we are committed to a wider review of charity regulation following the passage of that bill. The wider review can explore how regulation can help to improve the situation for all charities, but especially the smaller charities, which again have been mentioned by a number of contributors today. Of course, they make up the majority of the Scottish charity sector. I am also well aware of the pressures, particularly that the smaller charities are under, and their absolute determination to ensure that, as we move forward with any wider review, we are working with the charity sector from the largest to the smallest charities to ensure that we are engaging with everyone as we move forward with this. We will take time to work with them to design the review and what needs to be taken account in that. I am absolutely happy to confirm that organisations such as SCVO, which have been mentioned today, will play an important role in that. Again, a number of members have mentioned the very important aspect that we all have a responsibility to try and encourage, and that is about the diversity of experience on charity boards. That is very, very important. That is particularly important for charities who want to ensure that those with lived experience are part of their trustee boards. The aspects around automatic disqualification and the extension of that to match those in other parts of the UK are not designed to exclude those with lived experience from participation on charity boards. The measures are designed to address a comparative weakness in the regularity system here in Scotland that could undermine public trust and confidence in the charity brand. The existing waiver system and its extension to the new criteria demonstrates that the law recognises that there will be cases where a person who is disqualified can still and should still hold the trustee or senior management position. It is important that we encourage charities to recognise that that is there and to take advantage of that should we wish to do so. Jeremy Balfour and others discussed the appointment of interim trustees. That power to appoint interim trustees is a targeted power. It is very much intended to just be used in emergency measures to address situations where, for example, there are no trustees there to take decisions. It is a time-limited measure to safeguard charities and charitable assets and to get the charity back up and running. In situations like that, where there are no trustees about a dispute mechanism, I would contend that it is not necessary. However, if Mr Balfour or other members believe that this is something that should be looked at, I would be, of course, happy to meet with members as we progress to stage 2 to see if anything more needs to be done on that. Charity trustees are, as many people have mentioned, are responsible for managing money and property donated to the public in good faith. That is why, as a result of current and proposed disqualification criteria, they are based on behaviours or conduct that the Government considers makes a person unsuitable to hold office as a charity trustee and for that to be extended to those in senior management positions. Disqualification on the grounds of a specified defence of bankruptcy is time-limited and, once that convention is spent, or the bankruptcy is discharged, that disqualification falls. In the interim, the individual can participate in the charity in alternative ways, for example, as a volunteer or can apply to Oscar for a waiver. The challenges that are faced by smaller charities, I would like to spend a little bit more time on, now we do recognise that the concerns about the administrative burdens that this bill would give to charities and particularly to smaller charities, but I would say and try to reassure members on the fact that the main administrative change that will impact following from that is the provision of trustee information to Oscar, and that will take place using Oscar's existing online system that charities will be familiar with and, of course, it will be something that will be done over time. The development, the introduction and the population of the internal schedule of charity trustees is likely to take place over two to three years, for example, and therefore charities will have significant time to prepare, but it is important and I reassure members that we will continue to work with charities as we go forward with this bill and in the implementation to ensure that we are fully cognisant of any burdens that are being placed, but particularly on smaller charities. In relation to that, of course, I would say that it is anticipated that there will be two commencement regulations for this bill, one in spring 24 and one in summer 25, and that will not only allow Oscar sufficient time to prepare and consult on the new guidance, but then, very importantly, and again, this has been something raised by a number of members to communicate this to charities and to ensure that they are well prepared for the changes. In conclusion, I think that the message from today's debate is, therefore, that there is broad agreement on the general principles of this bill. Yes, there is work to do, but I certainly hope that we can work together on that as we move to stage 2. It is very important, I hope, to send a clear signal out from the chamber today about this Parliament's determination to support Scotland's charities. I do look forward to the bill progressing into the next stage, but I would end very importantly once again by thanking all those who work in our third sector for everything that they do day in, day out to support communities, not just across Scotland but across the world. That concludes the debate on charities regulation and administration's Scotland bill at stage 1. It is time to move on to the next item of business, which is consideration of motion 8683 on a financial resolution for the charities regulation and administration's Scotland bill. I invite Shirley-Anne Somerville to move the motion. The question on this motion will be put at decision time. I am minded to accept a motion without notice under rule 11.2.4 of standing orders that decision time be brought forward to now, and I invite the Minister for Parliamentary Business to move the motion. The question is that decision time be brought forward to now. Are we all agreed? We are agreed, and the first question is that motion 8870, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, on charities regulation and administration's Scotland bill be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The final question is that motion 8683, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the charities regulation and administration's Scotland bill be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. That concludes decision time, and I close this meeting.