That may be so. However, the removal of subsection (2) will, again, widen the definition of realisable property. In particular, it will enable the clause to bite on property held in trust by the accused or the recipient of a tainted gift. Again, I do not expect the Minister to be in a position to enlighten the Committee further now, but this seems to be another area in which Scots law was different and provided a greater degree of protection. It would therefore be useful to know what the provision was designed to achieve, as, unless I am mistaken, it does not appear in the English section. I think that it was designed to protect certain interests held in trust. I presume that there was thought to be a good reason for doing that in Scots law—I see that a note is being passed to the Minister.