Hansard

Good morning. It is good to join committee members for stage 2 consideration over the next five minutes or so—maybe longer. I thank the committee and all stakeholders for their comments on the bill. The amendments in the group address two key issues that were raised at stage 1 and make the bill stronger as a result.In its stage 1 report, the committee asked the Scottish Government to reflect on whether certain things should be excluded from the bill’s provisions with a view to lodging any necessary amendments at stage 2. Some stakeholders, in their stage 1 evidence, expressed concern that the bill might disapply other legislation unintentionally or could otherwise lead to uncertainty about which legislation should apply when certain things are deemed to be digital assets by the bill. Having listened to stakeholders and the committee, and having considered that further, I have lodged amendments 2 and 4, which make it clear that the substantive provisions of the bill—sections 2 to 4—are subject to any other enactment, whenever passed or made. Therefore, the amendments effectively look both backwards and forwards.The bill provides that section 2 is “subject to any enactment”. Amendment 4 extends that requirement to sections 3 and 4. Amendment 2 amends section 2 in light of that broader approach.The amendments align with the suggestion that was made by the Rt Hon Lord Hodge in his additional written submission to the committee, dated 19 December. My officials have engaged with him and Professor Fox in the development of amendments 2 and 4, as well as amendment 1.Amendments 2 and 4 provide that, if there is specific provision in other legislation that relates to the nature, ownership or acquisition of ownership of things that qualify as digital assets, the relevant provisions in that other legislation will apply. Looking forward, likewise, the amendments mean that, if future legislation makes provision about the nature, ownership or acquisition of ownership of things that qualify as digital assets, and if that provision is inconsistent with the provision made in the bill, the provisions in future legislation will take precedence over any relevant provisions in the bill, to the extent of any inconsistencies.I turn to amendment 1. It is important that the bill does not undermine legal certainty where it already exists. Issues that are specific to electronic trade documents were raised in evidence by a representative of the Law Society of Scotland, academics at the University of Aberdeen and members of the committee. They advanced the position that such documents should be specifically excluded from the bill’s scope, given that they are already governed by provisions in the Electronic Trade Documents Act 2023.Having considered that evidence, I lodged amendment 1, which explicitly excludes electronic trade documents, as they are defined in the 2023 act, from the definition of a digital asset in the bill. That means that the bill’s provisions will not apply in relation to those electronic trade documents. I ask members to support my amendments in the group.I move amendment 1.