Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
14
Parties on record
2,096,833
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,096,833 contributions in session S6, 11 May 2026 – 10 Jun 2026. Latest 30 days: 2,655. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 09 Jun 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 06 February 2024

06 Feb 2024 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Arthur, Tom SNP Renfrewshire South Watch on SPTV

I will come on to further detail of what we will take forward in the regulations.

The detail of how the proposals will work in practice will be set out in regulations. I accept the Economy and Fair Work Committee’s recommendation that it should scrutinise those details ahead of stage 3 of the bill.

We have recently completed a consultation on proposals for the regulations and the feedback is being analysed. At a high level, I confirm that the majority of respondents were in favour of most of the proposals, subject to the caveats that responses were qualified by respondents’ narrative comments and that we have agreed to allow a short extension to accommodate stakeholders who have asked for additional time. However, it is clear that comments on the eligibility criteria for the moratorium, on which there are a range of views, will need to be considered carefully. That is noted in the stage 1 report of the Economy and Fair Work Committee.

The protections that could be offered to someone who is eligible for the scheme are significant. Therefore, I want to be cautious about setting the eligibility criteria too widely. We do not want to discourage creditors from lending to the group whom we are most trying to help. I am keen to avoid that, so I will look to find a good balance. We already have in place a standard moratorium that gives people who are struggling with debts six months’ protection from creditors. It provides them with time to decide how best to deal with their debts. For many people, that standard moratorium will be sufficient.

The committee’s report recommends that we should increase the protection for persons under a mental health moratorium, specifically in relation to eviction and the installation of prepayment meters. We already have measures in place in Scotland to protect people from eviction. Those include a statutory requirement for the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service to consider the reasonableness of granting an eviction in all cases, including when there are arrears of rent. However, I will look into the matter to provide assurance on that point. The installation of prepayment meters might be more difficult to address, but I am writing to the UK Government on that and am happy to consider what further action might be needed on it. I will keep the committee fully informed.

The working group recommended that the moratorium would not be appropriate where a debtor lacked the capacity to consent. I note that the committee has recommended that that should be reconsidered. The issue was discussed in the recent consultation, and I will reconsider it in the light of the committee’s views once I have had the chance to consider the consultation responses.

I will also look at the committee’s concerns about the public register and consider how it can be introduced in a way that addresses those concerns. I am mindful of the fact that, as well as protecting the interests of the individuals who enter a mental health moratorium, we need to protect the legitimate interests of creditors. I will continue to look for a solution that can meet both those objectives.

I appreciate that concerns have been expressed about the extra pressure that may be placed on the advice sector by introducing a mental health moratorium. The sector has been helping to shape the proposals, and I will continue to consider the potential impact on it as we seek to finalise the detail behind the scheme. I also confirm that the Scottish Government will work with the advice and mental health sectors to develop clear guidance and training to enable them to deliver the mental health moratorium. We will work with them to ensure that the tools that they need are available.

When I gave evidence to the committee, my colleague Kevin Stewart recommended that we should seek input from the lived experience forum on the proposals for the mental health moratorium. I confirm that we have engaged with that forum and are arranging an event with it to seek such input.

Other provisions in the bill make minor and technical amendments to the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 2016 that would serve to provide clarity and improve the operation of the bankruptcy process. The bill will provide more efficient recovery processes to assist businesses and local authorities to collect debts from those who can pay, while, importantly, protecting those who are unable to pay.

The bankruptcy and diligence provisions in the bill implement measures that were supported by stakeholders in response to a consultation that was carried out between August and October 2022. That consultation sought feedback on proposals from members of the working groups in stage 2 of the Scottish Government’s review of the operation of existing statutory debt solutions.

I am pleased to note the Economy and Fair Work Committee’s support for the measures that are set out in the bill. I have noted the committee’s recommendations that amendments should be introduced at stage 2 to allow for the discharge of trustees when debtors have not co-operated in their bankruptcy, the charging of statutory interest and the recall of bankruptcy, and to extend the time in which a sheriff’s officer can serve a warrant to cite a debtor in a petition for sequestration. I will look at those matters further in the light of the committee’s report and consider whether amendments might be appropriate.

There are some other matters that stakeholders raised in their evidence to the committee that we will look at, but which can be addressed through secondary legislation. Those matters include the minimum period for reapplying for bankruptcy under the minimum assets procedure and the minimum income for earnings arrestment. As I said to the committee, when issues can be addressed in secondary legislation, that is often the best way in which to address them. I am committed to further engagement with stakeholders on those matters, because, as the committee notes, some concerns about unintended impacts were raised in the evidence sessions. The working groups that were involved in looking at each of the statutory debt solutions also made recommendations that can be dealt with through secondary legislation.

The bill is therefore part of a package of legislation. Together, we will make important changes to our debt solutions. I expect to start bringing forward regulations later this month, and I will bring forward further regulations in the next few months. Those regulations will include important changes to protected trust deeds.

As I have said, the bill is part of a wider programme of reform. We have commissioned an independent review to assess how far current statutory debt solutions meet the needs of a modern economy. That work is being taken forward by Yvonne MacDermid OBE. Yvonne brings a wealth of experience to that work, having served as chief executive at Money Advice Scotland for many years. She has been setting the foundations for the review and will shortly commence a set of stakeholder meetings to help to inform her work.

In summary, the bill will make small but important changes to bankruptcy and diligence. The introduction of a mental health moratorium is an important step that will help those with the most severe mental health conditions and financial challenges.

I look forward to hearing members’ views this afternoon, and I ask them to support the bill at decision time.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Bill.

In the same item of business

The Presiding Officer (Alison Johnstone) NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-12070, in the name of Tom Arthur, on the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I ask membe...
The Minister for Community Wealth and Public Finance (Tom Arthur) SNP
I am grateful for the opportunity to address the chamber on the general principles of the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Bill. The bill is not a big one...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
Does Tom Arthur not recognise that the very fact that the bill is an enabling bill, rather than one that sets out criteria, mechanisms and thresholds, makes ...
Tom Arthur SNP
The member makes a fair point, which I will turn to as I progress through my prepared remarks. I commend the members of the mental health moratorium working...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
The problem with the working group’s recommendations is that, if the Government eventually adopted them as its proposals, they would give people who are suff...
Tom Arthur SNP
I will come on to further detail of what we will take forward in the regulations. The detail of how the proposals will work in practice will be set out in ...
The Presiding Officer NPA
Thank you. Members may wish to know that we have time in hand this afternoon, and that we hope to give back time for any interventions taken. 14:38
Claire Baker (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Lab
I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Economy and Fair Work Committee in the role of convener in this stage 1 debate on the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotla...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a member of the Law Society of Scotland, albeit not currently practising. I echo th...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
Does Murdo Fraser agree that it would be beneficial for the overall culture of enterprise in this country if we had a less stigmatising approach to bankruptc...
Murdo Fraser Con
I totally agree with that interesting intervention. In the United States, successful entrepreneurs often fail in business for a number of times before they a...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Does Murdo Fraser agree that there is an interesting contrast between public agencies and private businesses in the approaches that are being taken? The bank...
Murdo Fraser Con
Mr Johnson makes a very fair point. In the evidence that was given to the committee, some of the strongest-worded evidence against some of the additional pro...
Fergus Ewing (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) SNP
Murdo Fraser sets out the challenge very clearly. Is there not a concomitant risk that many debtors who are aware of the fact that mental health may provide ...
Murdo Fraser Con
Fergus Ewing, with his usual lawyerly background, makes a fair point about the potential for unintended consequences. I was pleased to note that, in his let...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
Yes, please go ahead, Mr Fraser.
Murdo Fraser Con
The question of the discharge of trustees was alluded to by the committee’s convener. The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland told us in evidence ...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
All too often, poor mental health and debt go hand in hand and lead to absolutely disastrous social consequences, both for the people who are immediately aff...
Stephen Kerr Con
Will the member take an intervention?
Daniel Johnson Lab
I will take the intervention in a second. The Royal Edinburgh hospital is in my constituency—I am contacted by people there, but very often, it is quite far...
Stephen Kerr Con
Does Daniel Johnson agree, however, that at the end of this legislative process, people in Scotland who are in the distressing circumstances that we are outl...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Mr Kerr makes a valid point. In approaching this legislation, we need to ensure that we do the most that we can. If there are examples from elsewhere, in par...
Brian Whittle (South Scotland) (Con) Con
Does the member recognise that if we were to expand those criteria, with which I think most of us would agree, the issue of resource would have to be addressed?
Daniel Johnson Lab
I was coming to that very point. Although I think that a threshold that includes all those who are undergoing mental health treatment would be far too low, a...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
I remind all members who seek to speak in the debate to ensure that they have pressed their request-to-speak buttons. We move to the open debate. 15:13
Colin Beattie (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) SNP
I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in the debate on the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Bill at stage 1, particularly as I am a member of the ...
Stephen Kerr Con
Does the member share the concerns that I and other people have expressed about the Government’s stated intention to create a public register of those who wo...
Colin Beattie SNP
I recognise the sensitivity of the public register, and there will be further debate and discussion on that. Other concerns exist that the mental health mo...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
It is a pleasure to follow Colin Beattie, who gave a considered and thoughtful speech that highlighted many issues of concern about the bill that I wish to r...
Alasdair Allan (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) SNP
Will the member give way?