Chamber and committees

So far, no concerns have been raised with me on that. Officials have reached out to stakeholders and to members ahead of this stage, but if any member has concerns that they want to highlight to me ahead of stage 3, I am happy to discuss them. However, at this stage, no concerns have been raised, so I am content.

No, thank you. I will just press amendment 1.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Section 1, as amended, agreed to.

Section 2—Formation of contract: general

Amendments 2 to 5 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 2, as amended, agreed to.

Section 3—Conclusion of contract by unnotified acts

Amendments 6 and 7 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 3, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 4 and 5 agreed to.

Section 6—Lapsing of offer on fundamental change of circumstances

Amendments 8 to 10 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 6, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 7 to 12 agreed to.

Section 13—When notification takes effect

10:00

Amendment 11 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 13, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 14 and 15 agreed to.

Section 16—Autonomy of parties: application of sections 17 to 21 and of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

I will begin with amendment 13. Sections 18 to 21 of the bill define a new remedy of return of benefits received after rescission—termination—of a contract for material breach. Section 19 sets out rules on the valuation of a non-money benefit that is not returnable by the recipient, under sections 18(6) and 18(7). When determining the value which must be paid in lieu of returning an item or for a service, the valuation of the item or service is assessed at the time of the party’s performance providing that benefit, as set out in section 19(2). Additional guidance is provided in sections 19(3) and 19(4). The present formulation of section 19(2) appears to infer that the party seeking restitution must show that it has performed the whole of the obligation incumbent upon it before its claim can succeed. That goes too far, in my view, as what is recoverable is any performance in so far as it has not been reciprocated by the recipient in accordance with the contract. Accordingly, my amendment 13 removes the words “of the obligation” from section 19(2).

I am pleased to speak to the remaining amendments in the group, which will restate and reform the law of retention. The amendments build on the work that was undertaken by the Scottish Law Commission and separately by Lorna Richardson of the University of Edinburgh. In 2018, the SLC said that, although the law of retention needed some clarification, it should be left to the courts to do that. By 2024, though, the SLC’s position had changed and stakeholders agreed that legislation was needed to bring clarity to the law. The Scottish Government consulted on a scheme for the reform of retention and my amendments 14 to 17 give effect to that.

At stage 1, there was a question about whether the provisions would be default provisions. Amendment 12 is clear on the principle of party autonomy and has the effect that the provisions on contractual retention are default rules. It is therefore open to parties to provide their own, different rules or to fall back on these default rules.

I have considered the drafting suggestions to improve the bill and I wrote to the committee ahead of today’s session to set out my views. I believe that my amendment 17 addresses the concerns raised by the Law Society and Dr Hamish Patrick about particular transactions. As to the comments made by the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland, I believe that the amendments also address its concerns.

I move amendment 12 in my name and ask members to support it and my other amendments in the group.

Amendment 12 agreed to.

Section 16, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 17 and 18 agreed to.

Section 19—Value of benefit

Amendment 13 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 19, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 20 and 21 agreed to.

After section 21

Amendments 14 to 17 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Sections 22 to 26 agreed to.

Long title agreed to.

Good morning. First, I want to thank the committee and all stakeholders for their comments on the bill as introduced. I believe that the amendments that I have lodged address a number of those comments and make the bill stronger.

Amendments 1, 2 and 5 to 10 respond to the comments made by Dumfries and Galloway Council, which stated that in

“section 2, the terms ‘Formation’ and ‘Conclusion’”

are

“used interchangeably.”

I agree that a more consistent term could usefully be used throughout part 1 of the bill, and these amendments do that by preferring the use of the term “formation”.

The committee asked the Scottish Government to consider the drafting point raised in the written evidence of Professor Stephen Bogle and Tom Johnson that section 2(2) is overly “verbose”. Having considered the drafting in light of those comments, I have lodged amendment 3 to simplify the provision.

Amendment 4 relates to section 2, which provides that whether a contract exists is to be determined from the statements and conduct of the parties. So long as the parties are agreed on the necessary content, there can be a contract, even though the parties are continuing to negotiate on other matters that might be relevant to their transaction. However, there might be circumstances in which parties want to agree all matters before forming a contract and, as a result, section 2(3) allows parties to a contract to specify in advance matters on which there needs to be agreement before any contract is formed. The Law Society is concerned about the drafting of section 2(3) of the bill because it thinks that there is a risk that it could apply to situations in which one party

“subjectively intends not to contract prior to agreement on a certain point.”

It has suggested that section 2(3) be amended to include the need for some form of express communication of agreement. Amendment 4 does that by making it clear that the party specifying the essential matters of a contract must do so “explicitly”.

I come to amendment 11. Section 13(1) provides that any notification in relation to the formation of a contract takes effect when it reaches the addressee. However, by virtue of section 13(2), it is subject to any time limit for acceptance referred to in section 11(1)(a). As drafted, section 13(1) is not subject to section 11(1)(b). Section 11(1)(b) says that if no timeframe for acceptance is stated, an acceptance is effective only if it occurs

“within a reasonable time after the notification of the offer has taken effect.”

The effect of that drafting is that, in general, acceptances must be notified to the offeror within any time limit stated in the offer, but, where there is no stated timeframe, it would be possible for an acceptance to be effective when it has been communicated unreasonably late. Amendment 11 deals with that anomaly by providing that, for an acceptance to be effective to form a contract, it must be notified either within any time limit stated in the offer or within a reasonable time.

I move amendment 1, and I ask members to support my other amendments in the group. I am happy to take any questions.

::I am sorry. I sometimes think that Kenny Gibson is a walking encyclopaedia. He gave a very in-depth historical overview, outlining how deep-rooted Jewish hatred can be and how it must be challenged.

Jackson Carlaw set out his very personal journey, over many years, of trying to understand why this happened, only to find that there is no answer. He made it clear that antisemitism is on the rise and that we all have a responsibility to challenge it and to confront it at every opportunity, and the same view was echoed by Maggie Chapman and Beatrice Wishart.

Paul O’Kane and Stephen Kerr raised the importance of education. As Mr O’Kane said, our Parliament must move forward in leading the nation in remembrance and also education. We need to bridge the gap and ensure that living testimony continues through education.

I thank Beatrice Wishart so much for her very emotive contribution. Genocide is not consigned to the history books, and it is important that we bridge the generations.

Today, we honour the 6 million Jewish men, women and children who were murdered as well as the millions more who were targeted, persecuted and killed by the Nazis. We also pay our respects to the countless number of innocent people whose lives were callously cut short in the genocides that followed in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.

Holocaust memorial day marks the liberation of Auschwitz, a place of unspeakable cruelty and an inescapable reminder of the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazi regime. It is vital to understand that that crime against humanity was not sudden in nature, nor was it inevitable. It was instead the result of creeping yet purposeful dehumanisation of the Jewish people, whose very basic human rights were eroded in a climate of the most extreme hatred.

When I had the privilege of visiting Srebrenica last year with fellow member Paul O’Kane as part of a delegation to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Bosnian genocide, I was overwhelmed by the care that was given to building a lasting legacy to the 8,000 Muslim men and boys who were massacred by Bosnian Serb soldiers. That was the largest incident of mass murder in Europe since the second world war, but much like the Holocaust, its roots can be tracked back to intensifying levels of prejudice, which sowed the seeds of the genocidal acts that would later follow.

Such deplorable events have left lasting scars on our world, and they are a stark warning of the terrible consequences if we stand idle in the face of bigotry and discrimination. Committing to confronting and learning from the horrors of the past must never serve only as words but must be a moral obligation and a call to action that unites each and every one of us. The recent horrific attacks that occurred in Manchester and at Bondi beach, in my home city of Sydney, show us that there must be a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. That is why the Scottish Government is taking decisive measures to ensure that all our diverse communities are robustly protected against those who seek to cause them harm.

Our hate crime strategy aims not only to ensure that victims of prejudicial criminality are cared for and supported but to strategically address the roots of such behaviour by engaging constructively with partners in the justice system. Schools play a vital role in supporting children and young people to challenge prejudices such as antisemitism, and they help our young people to value a diverse and respectful Scotland. By educating our young people about all cultures, faiths and belief systems, we support them to become responsible and truly global citizens, while helping to counteract prejudice and exclusion at the earliest opportunity.

We see Holocaust education as a vital component of that work, which is why we continue to be committed to providing opportunities for Scotland’s children and young people to learn about the Holocaust and contemporary antisemitism in our curriculum. That includes providing grant funding of up to £200,000 in this financial year to the Holocaust Educational Trust’s lessons from Auschwitz programme, which gives students and teachers an opportunity to visit Auschwitz. We also give £40,500 of funding to Vision Schools Scotland, which encourages effective school-based Holocaust education by supporting teachers in their teaching of the Holocaust and in addressing antisemitism.

Before I close, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the Scottish ceremony that was kindly hosted at the Parliament last Thursday night by our friends at the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, which Karen Adam referred to in her contribution. It was an honour to share the platform with two remarkable individuals: Joan Salter, a survivor of the Holocaust, and Var Ashe Houston, a survivor of the Cambodian genocide. They shared with us very personal and, at times, emotional and heartbreaking yet inspiring stories of survival in the face of some of the worst adversities that one could possibly imagine. Also in attendance and providing a range of poignant reflections, as Jackson Carlaw referred to in his contribution, were a number of young people, including ambassadors from the Anne Frank Trust and the Holocaust Educational Trust. Their compassionate and considered contributions brought to light why the message of this year’s theme—“Bridging Generations”—is so vital in these precarious times and why, by carrying forward the voices of the past, we can work collectively towards a better future.

We are now, more than ever, duty bound to preserve the memories of Holocaust survivors. This responsibility takes an even greater resonance as we seek to guard against growing distortion and those whose motivation is to undermine the truth and the horrors that human beings can inflict on one another. By remaining unified in our resolve to resist exclusionary and dehumanising narratives and instead champion the inclusive values that underpin our society, we together can have a Scotland where each of us may flourish, in safety and in peace.

::First, I thank Kenny Gibson for lodging the motion for today’s debate, which provides us with an invaluable opportunity to commemorate Holocaust memorial day. Whenever we have this debate, I always find it deeply moving to hear all the heartfelt reflections that members offer, but I find it equally uplifting that, during such a vital period of remembrance, we can all stand shoulder to shoulder.

There were so many excellent speeches; every single one was excellent, but I am just going to highlight a few. Kenny Gibson gave a very powerful speech. Kenny, I sometimes think that you are a walking encyclopaedia—

I am sorry. I sometimes think that Kenny Gibson is a walking encyclopaedia. He gave a very in-depth historical overview, outlining how deep-rooted Jewish hatred can be and how it must be challenged.

Jackson Carlaw set out his very personal journey, over many years, of trying to understand why this happened, only to find that there is no answer. He made it clear that antisemitism is on the rise and that we all have a responsibility to challenge it and to confront it at every opportunity, and the same view was echoed by Maggie Chapman and Beatrice Wishart.

Paul O’Kane and Stephen Kerr raised the importance of education. As Mr O’Kane said, our Parliament must move forward in leading the nation in remembrance and also education. We need to bridge the gap and ensure that living testimony continues through education.

I thank Beatrice Wishart so much for her very emotive contribution. Genocide is not consigned to the history books, and it is important that we bridge the generations.

Today, we honour the 6 million Jewish men, women and children who were murdered as well as the millions more who were targeted, persecuted and killed by the Nazis. We also pay our respects to the countless number of innocent people whose lives were callously cut short in the genocides that followed in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.

Holocaust memorial day marks the liberation of Auschwitz, a place of unspeakable cruelty and an inescapable reminder of the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazi regime.

It is vital to understand that that crime against humanity was not sudden in nature, nor was it inevitable. It was instead the result of creeping yet purposeful dehumanisation of the Jewish people, whose very basic human rights were eroded in a climate of the most extreme hatred.

When I had the privilege of visiting Srebrenica last year with fellow member Paul O’Kane as part of a delegation to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Bosnian genocide, I was overwhelmed by the care that was given to building a lasting legacy to the 8,000 Muslim men and boys who were massacred by Bosnian Serb soldiers. That was the largest incident of mass murder in Europe since the second world war, but much like the Holocaust, its roots can be tracked back to intensifying levels of prejudice, which sowed the seeds of the genocidal acts that would later follow.

Such deplorable events have left lasting scars on our world, and they are a stark warning of the terrible consequences if we stand idle in the face of bigotry and discrimination. Committing to confronting and learning from the horrors of the past must never serve only as words but must be a moral obligation and a call to action that unites each and every one of us. The recent horrific attacks that occurred in Manchester and at Bondi beach, in my home city of Sydney, show us that there must be a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. That is why the Scottish Government is taking decisive measures to ensure that all our diverse communities are robustly protected against those who seek to cause them harm.

Our hate crime strategy aims not only to ensure that victims of prejudicial criminality are cared for and supported but to strategically address the roots of such behaviour by engaging constructively with partners in the justice system. Schools play a vital role in supporting children and young people to challenge prejudices such as antisemitism, and they help our young people to value a diverse and respectful Scotland. By educating our young people about all cultures, faiths and belief systems, we support them to become responsible and truly global citizens, while helping to counteract prejudice and exclusion at the earliest opportunity.

We see Holocaust education as a vital component of that work, which is why we continue to be committed to providing opportunities for Scotland’s children and young people to learn about the Holocaust and contemporary antisemitism in our curriculum. That includes providing grant funding of up to £200,000 in this financial year to the Holocaust Educational Trust’s lessons from Auschwitz programme, which gives students and teachers an opportunity to visit Auschwitz. We also give £40,500 of funding to Vision Schools Scotland, which encourages effective school-based Holocaust education by supporting teachers in their teaching of the Holocaust and in addressing antisemitism.

Before I close, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the Scottish ceremony that was kindly hosted at the Parliament last Thursday night by our friends at the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, which Karen Adam referred to in her contribution. It was an honour to share the platform with two remarkable individuals: Joan Salter, a survivor of the Holocaust, and Var Ashe Houston, a survivor of the Cambodian genocide. They shared with us very personal and, at times, emotional and heartbreaking yet inspiring stories of survival in the face of some of the worst adversities that one could possibly imagine. Also in attendance and providing a range of poignant reflections, as Jackson Carlaw referred to in his contribution, were a number of young people, including ambassadors from the Anne Frank Trust and the Holocaust Educational Trust. Their compassionate and considered contributions brought to light why the message of this year’s theme—“Bridging Generations”—is so vital in these precarious times and why, by carrying forward the voices of the past, we can work collectively towards a better future.

We are now, more than ever, duty bound to preserve the memories of Holocaust survivors. This responsibility takes an even greater resonance as we seek to guard against growing distortion and those whose motivation is to undermine the truth and the horrors that human beings can inflict on one another. By remaining unified in our resolve to resist exclusionary and dehumanising narratives and instead champion the inclusive values that underpin our society, we together can have a Scotland where each of us may flourish, in safety and in peace.

First, I thank Kenny Gibson for lodging the motion for today’s debate, which provides us with an invaluable opportunity to commemorate Holocaust memorial day. Whenever we have this debate, I always find it deeply moving to hear all the heartfelt reflections that members offer, but I find it equally uplifting that, during such a vital period of remembrance, we can all stand shoulder to shoulder.

There were so many excellent speeches; every single one was excellent, but I am just going to highlight a few. Kenny Gibson gave a very powerful speech. Kenny, I sometimes think that you are a walking encyclopaedia—

First, I thank Kenny Gibson for lodging the motion for today’s debate, which provides us with an invaluable opportunity to commemorate Holocaust memorial day. Whenever we have this debate, I always find it deeply moving to hear all the heartfelt reflections that members offer, but I find it equally uplifting that, during such a vital period of remembrance, we can all stand shoulder to shoulder.

There were so many excellent speeches; every single one was excellent, but I am just going to highlight a few. Kenny Gibson gave a very powerful speech. Kenny, I sometimes think that you are a walking encyclopaedia—

I am sorry. I sometimes think that Kenny Gibson is a walking encyclopaedia. He gave a very in-depth historical overview, outlining how deep-rooted Jewish hatred can be and how it must be challenged.

Jackson Carlaw set out his very personal journey, over many years, of trying to understand why this happened, only to find that there is no answer. He made it clear that antisemitism is on the rise and that we all have a responsibility to challenge it and to confront it at every opportunity, and the same view was echoed by Maggie Chapman and Beatrice Wishart.

Paul O’Kane and Stephen Kerr raised the importance of education. As Mr O’Kane said, our Parliament must move forward in leading the nation in remembrance and also education. We need to bridge the gap and ensure that living testimony continues through education.

I thank Beatrice Wishart so much for her very emotive contribution. Genocide is not consigned to the history books, and it is important that we bridge the generations.

Today, we honour the 6 million Jewish men, women and children who were murdered as well as the millions more who were targeted, persecuted and killed by the Nazis. We also pay our respects to the countless number of innocent people whose lives were callously cut short in the genocides that followed in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.

Holocaust memorial day marks the liberation of Auschwitz, a place of unspeakable cruelty and an inescapable reminder of the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazi regime. It is vital to understand that that crime against humanity was not sudden in nature, nor was it inevitable. It was instead the result of creeping yet purposeful dehumanisation of the Jewish people, whose very basic human rights were eroded in a climate of the most extreme hatred.

When I had the privilege of visiting Srebrenica last year with fellow member Paul O’Kane as part of a delegation to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Bosnian genocide, I was overwhelmed by the care that was given to building a lasting legacy to the 8,000 Muslim men and boys who were massacred by Bosnian Serb soldiers. That was the largest incident of mass murder in Europe since the second world war, but much like the Holocaust, its roots can be tracked back to intensifying levels of prejudice, which sowed the seeds of the genocidal acts that would later follow.

Such deplorable events have left lasting scars on our world, and they are a stark warning of the terrible consequences if we stand idle in the face of bigotry and discrimination. Committing to confronting and learning from the horrors of the past must never serve only as words but must be a moral obligation and a call to action that unites each and every one of us. The recent horrific attacks that occurred in Manchester and at Bondi beach, in my home city of Sydney, show us that there must be a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. That is why the Scottish Government is taking decisive measures to ensure that all our diverse communities are robustly protected against those who seek to cause them harm.

Our hate crime strategy aims not only to ensure that victims of prejudicial criminality are cared for and supported but to strategically address the roots of such behaviour by engaging constructively with partners in the justice system. Schools play a vital role in supporting children and young people to challenge prejudices such as antisemitism, and they help our young people to value a diverse and respectful Scotland. By educating our young people about all cultures, faiths and belief systems, we support them to become responsible and truly global citizens, while helping to counteract prejudice and exclusion at the earliest opportunity.

We see Holocaust education as a vital component of that work, which is why we continue to be committed to providing opportunities for Scotland’s children and young people to learn about the Holocaust and contemporary antisemitism in our curriculum. That includes providing grant funding of up to £200,000 in this financial year to the Holocaust Educational Trust’s lessons from Auschwitz programme, which gives students and teachers an opportunity to visit Auschwitz. We also give £40,500 of funding to Vision Schools Scotland, which encourages effective school-based Holocaust education by supporting teachers in their teaching of the Holocaust and in addressing antisemitism.

Before I close, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the Scottish ceremony that was kindly hosted at the Parliament last Thursday night by our friends at the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, which Karen Adam referred to in her contribution. It was an honour to share the platform with two remarkable individuals: Joan Salter, a survivor of the Holocaust, and Var Ashe Houston, a survivor of the Cambodian genocide. They shared with us very personal and, at times, emotional and heartbreaking yet inspiring stories of survival in the face of some of the worst adversities that one could possibly imagine. Also in attendance and providing a range of poignant reflections, as Jackson Carlaw referred to in his contribution, were a number of young people, including ambassadors from the Anne Frank Trust and the Holocaust Educational Trust. Their compassionate and considered contributions brought to light why the message of this year’s theme—“Bridging Generations”—is so vital in these precarious times and why, by carrying forward the voices of the past, we can work collectively towards a better future.

We are now, more than ever, duty bound to preserve the memories of Holocaust survivors. This responsibility takes an even greater resonance as we seek to guard against growing distortion and those whose motivation is to undermine the truth and the horrors that human beings can inflict on one another. By remaining unified in our resolve to resist exclusionary and dehumanising narratives and instead champion the inclusive values that underpin our society, we together can have a Scotland where each of us may flourish, in safety and in peace.