 The next item of business is a debate on motion 7584 on the name of Tom Arthur on the Edinburgh Bakers widows fund bill. Can I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now? I call on Tom Arthur to speak and move the motion. Mr Arthur, six minutes please. Thank you Presiding Officer. I am pleased to open the preliminary stage debate on the Edinburgh Bakers widows fund bill. I would like to thank the other committee y bydd y cyfnodau, Alison Harris a Mary Fee, yn gweithio'r bydd yn gweithio'r bydd. The Edinburgh Bakers Widow Fund Bill was introduced on 20 March 2017 and is being promoted by the trustees of the widow scheme. The overall objective of the bill, in essence, is to transfer the property and assets of the widow's fund for the incorporation of bakers within the city of Edinburgh to a new charitable trust. The bill is the first private bill to be debated in the chamber this session. It is not a controversial bill and no objections were received. The first thing that struck me about the bill was its title. I must admit to having been unfamiliar with the fund. The committee gained some insight into the history of the rules governing trade incorporations in Edinburgh and how they now affect a trade scheme and now affect a trade some 200 years later. The incorporation of bakers of the city of Edinburgh was one of the trade incorporations set up in the medieval times to regulate trade and, in 1803, a scheme was formed to provide the fund for bakers widows, an act of 1813 that was passed, authorising the scheme. The fund was established to provide financial support to the widows of contributing members. The last contribution to the fund was made back in 1981 and the last annuity that was paid under the scheme was in 1997. Since then, there have been no qualifying beneficiaries. During promoters' evidence session to the committee on 14 June 2017, Lady Elizabeth Drummond explained that the question of introducing a private bill was raised a number of years ago. She said, and I quote, "...we had this widows fund for which a number of trustees was getting smaller. People were dying and there was nobody around to look after it. We saw that it would not be attractive or viable because of the very abrupt entry requirements under the 1813 act. You have to be male and under 45. The benefits that might occur to anyone were so vague and difficult to understand that it would not be an attractive vehicle for people to put their moneys into." Consecretly, the trustees were left with a fund of considerable value. However, it was simply not viable to promote the fund as, for example, an investment vehicle or a newty provider in competition with large pension providers. As the trustees quoted, it would be trying to set up something in competition with standard life. In 2013, the trustees decided that the scheme should not continue to operate in its current form and formally close the scheme to new members. Currently, there are two wives or contributing members who could qualify in the future for annuities if they were widowed. The promoter has advised that the wives have agreed to accept a payment in lieu of potential future annuities to which they might have been entitled as widows in terms of the 1813 act. In place of the fund, the trustees proposed to set up a new charitable trust that would make use of the money that has been invested by supporting education and training and being promoted through the baking community. In response to the committee's queries about the purpose of the original fund being in line with those of a new charity, the promoters explained that, and I quote, "...we felt that that was the best way to go to make a genuinely good use of the assets in line with the spirit of the incorporation of bakers of the city of Edinburgh so that we could get practical modern usage out of the money by promoting baking in the city of Edinburgh. That was one way to use the money and creating a charitable vehicle was a way to encase it in a fully responsible mechanism that fits today's purpose." The purposes of the new trust are the advancement of education by supporting education and training opportunities in baking and the advancement of the arts, heritage, culture and science by providing public information and promoting an appreciation of local baking and the history of the baking trade, particularly in Edinburgh. The new trust, the incorporation of bakers of Edinburgh Charitable Trust, has been approved by the Office of the Scottish Charities Regulator. On the basis of the evidence received, the committee is satisfied that the 1813 act has clearly become outdated and restrictive and that the trustees are correct in seeking a practical way of allowing the money and the fund to be redirected to a new set of objectives. Therefore, I move motion S5M-07584 that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Edinburgh Bakers Wadoe Fund Bill and that it should recede as a private bill. Thank you, Mr Arthur. I now call Alison Harris. Four minutes are there about, please, Ms Harris. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Firstly, I would like to thank the convener, Tom Arthur, for moving the motion. As Tom Arthur said, this is the first private bill to be debated in the Parliament this session. As such, I thought that members may be interested to have some brief information about private bills more generally and why they are necessary. A private bill is introduced by an outside promoter and is about making specific changes to the law affecting the promoter, rather than about changing the public and general law. In practice, many private bills are about updating bits of private legislation that were passed a long time ago and have therefore become increasingly outdated. In today's case, the act dates back to 1813. With private bills, there is always a right for the people or organisations who consider that a bill would adversely affect their interests to formally object to the bill. However, in some cases, including the Edinburgh Bakers Widows Fund, which we are debating today, no such objections were received. Nevertheless, the Parliament has an obligation to scrutinise the bill and to satisfy itself that the changes to the law that the promoter is seeking are reasonable and appropriate. I had no real awareness of private bills before being nominated for this committee, and I have found it an interesting insight into this little-known aspect of the Parliament's work. As with public bills, most of the detailed scrutiny of a private bill is undertaken by a committee. However, there are some important differences between the two types of committees, including the fact that the private bill committees are always ad hoc committees set up to scrutinise a particular bill. Any MSPs who have a close connection to the area that is affected by the bill are prevented from serving on the committee. The first stage of the private bill committee process is roughly equivalent to stage 1 of a public bill and is known as the preliminary stage. There are three aspects to the committee's task at the preliminary stage. Firstly, taking evidence and reaching a view on whether the general principles of the bill should be approved. Secondly, reaching a view on whether the bill should proceed as a private bill, and thirdly, giving preliminary consideration to any objections. If the Parliament approves the general principles of the bill and agrees that it should proceed as a private bill, the bill goes on to the consideration stage, roughly equivalent to stage 2 of a public bill. On to the final stage, where the Parliament debates whether the bill should be passed. In terms of the Edinburgh Bakers Widow Fund bill reaching the conclusion of the preliminary stage, the committee is pleased to support the promoters of the bill in their quest to set up a charitable scheme that will not only make good use of the moneys contained within the original Edinburgh Bakers Widow Fund but should offer other benefits to the wider community in the future, as we have already heard in Tom Arthur's speech today. Before I move on to the main focus of my speech, can I take this opportunity to thank the clerks to the committee for the help and support that they have given not only to me but also to my colleagues in the committee, Tom Arthur and Alison Harris? The convener has outlined the objectives of the bill and affect the general principles. In closing the debate, I will focus on the second part of the committee's role at preliminary stage to satisfy itself that the bill should proceed as a private bill. One of the aspects of the role is for the committee to satisfy itself as to the adequacy of accompanying documents to allow proper scrutiny of the bill. The promoter's statement sets out how the promoter has notified and made information available to those likely to be affected. The explanatory notes, as with any public bill, aim to summarise objectively what each provision of the bill does. Finally, the promoter's memorandum must set out the objectives of the bill, whether alternative ways of meeting those objectives were considered, and if so, why the approach taken in the private bill was adopted and the consultation was undertaken. I will not go into the detail of the committee's consideration of the explanatory notes and promoter's statement. Suffice to say that the committee was satisfied that the documents met the necessary requirements. However, I would like to say a bit more about the promoter's memorandum. The convener, Tom Arthur, has already set out the objectives of the bill and the committee was content that the memorandum set those out in adequate detail. In terms of alternative ways of meeting the bill's objectives, the trustees considered a number of options for transferring the assets and liabilities of the fund to a non-statutory charitable body and settled on a deed of trust, which would be regulated by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, Oscar. Having agreed a structure, various mechanisms were then considered to affect the transfer to the new trust, including applying to the court of session to have the terms of the trust varied. In that context, the committee noted that the new charity would have a significant change of purpose from providing financial support for widows to supporting education and training in relation to baking. The committee was aware that the law recognises that arrangements for administering trusts such as the widows fund can become outdated over time and that it is possible for the courts to approve additional administrative powers, for example. However, in general, the courts will only agree to change the purposes of a trust to something closely aligned to the original purpose. The promoter felt that none of the alternative remedies would enable the purpose of the trust to be changed and concluded that the most appropriate method of amending the objectives of the bill was to promote a private bill. In terms of consultation, the committee was content that adequate consultation had been carried out by the promoters with members of the incorporation, with the two wives of contributing members of the fund and with Oscar. In conclusion, the committee was satisfied that the accompanying documents were fit for purpose and that, overall, the bill should proceed as a private bill. That concludes the debate on the Edinburgh Bakers widows fund bill. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. For a few moments, I will pause to allow members to take their seats on the front benches.