The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
The Official Report search offers lots of different ways to find the information you’re looking for. The search is used as a professional tool by researchers and third-party organisations. It is also used by members of the public who may have less parliamentary awareness. This means it needs to provide the ability to run complex searches, and the ability to browse reports or perform a simple keyword search.
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
Depending on the kind of search you want to do, one of these views will be the best option. The default view is to show the report for each meeting of Parliament or a committee. For a simple keyword search, the results will be shown by item of business.
When you choose to search by a particular MSP, the results returned will show each spoken contribution in Parliament or a committee, ordered by date with the most recent contributions first. This will usually return a lot of results, but you can refine your search by keyword, date and/or by meeting (committee or Chamber business).
We’ve chosen to display the entirety of each MSP’s contribution in the search results. This is intended to reduce the number of times that users need to click into an actual report to get the information that they’re looking for, but in some cases it can lead to very short contributions (“Yes.”) or very long ones (Ministerial statements, for example.) We’ll keep this under review and get feedback from users on whether this approach best meets their needs.
There are two types of keyword search:
If you select an MSP’s name from the dropdown menu, and add a phrase in quotation marks to the keyword field, then the search will return only examples of when the MSP said those exact words. You can further refine this search by adding a date range or selecting a particular committee or Meeting of the Parliament.
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
There are two ways of searching by date.
You can either use the Start date and End date options to run a search across a particular date range. For example, you may know that a particular subject was discussed at some point in the last few weeks and choose a date range to reflect that.
Alternatively, you can use one of the pre-defined date ranges under “Select a time period”. These are:
If you search by an individual session, the list of MSPs and committees will automatically update to show only the MSPs and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of MSPs and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of MSPs and committees will update to show the information that was current at that time.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 2160 contributions
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Jim Fairlie
I have been thinking for some time about the issue of the number of guns used during a hunt, and I have voiced my concern on that.
From everything that we have heard in the committee, when it comes to actually killing a wild animal in a swift and humane way, the number of guns seems to be a vital part of the process. When I asked Lord Bonomy about that during stage 1 evidence sessions, he responded—as Rachael Hamilton has just cited—by saying:
“I think that the number of guns is vital”.—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, 15 June 2022; c 47.]
One of the examples that I gave during the evidence sessions was of a person who has only two guns covering 150 yards of forestry. The fox would run straight through the middle and would not be shot. However, if the number of guns was increased to, for example, 15, it would be more likely that the fox would be shot, so the loophole of allowing dogs to hunt and kill a fox would be closed.
12:00My amendments 171 and 191 would amend sections 4 and 8, on licence provisions, to give specific examples of the kind of information that NatureScot can ask people to provide on their applications. That would be information on the number of dogs for which people are seeking permission and the number of guns that they intend to deploy. Amendments 157, 160, 172 and 173 carry on from that by amending both licensing sections so that NatureScot would have to require a minimum number of guns to be deployed when issuing a licence and put that number on the licence. That would mean that NatureScot would look at the information provided by the applicant and would make the decision on exactly what the minimum number of guns should be.
The principle of those amendments has been widely supported by a variety of stakeholders and committee members at stage 1. Stating in the bill what information may be required will give early notice to applicants of the type of information that will be required. The amendments could also assist in filling out some of the detail of the licensing framework—in particular, the type of information that applicants may require to include in their applications.
I know that Rachael Hamilton agrees with the principle, as she has lodged amendment 21, which is very similar to mine. It would amend section 4(2)(c) to include information that the relevant authority may require. My issue with Rachael Hamilton’s amendment, and the reason why I have lodged an alternative version, is that amendment 21 talks about
“the number of dogs or guns that would be ... licensed”.
I do not think that the wording is right in that the applicant would not know how many dogs or guns would be licensed, because that is a matter for the licensing authority to decide.
My amendment makes it clear that the applicant provides the information and then the licensing authority considers that information and reaches its decision. That might be to grant a licence for the number of dogs and guns that the applicant has stated on the form, or it might be to grant a licence for a different number. My amendment keeps the flexibility for the licensing authority to do just that.
I have also included the same requirement for section 8 licences, for environmental benefit, as for section 4 licences, on wildlife management, so that the requirements are consistent. It is absolutely right that the licensing authority has the final decision-making power for those licences, as it does for all other wildlife management licences.
It is important that we are clear about what we will expect under the licensing regime, which is why I have lodged the amendments. I hope that members agree and will support my amendments.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Jim Fairlie
Will the member take an intervention on that point?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Jim Fairlie
If all animals are sentient, how do you justify a fox killing a lamb or several lambs in order to take a tail or an ear to give as a trinket to cubs? Do we accept the fact that foxes will kill lambs?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Jim Fairlie
Will the member take an intervention on that point?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Jim Fairlie
Can Colin Smyth explain to the committee what other methods he would use in an area of woodland covering 1,000 acres?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2022
Jim Fairlie
Right. It has been a while since I have raced pigeons.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2022
Jim Fairlie
I understand that.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2022
Jim Fairlie
My question is on that point.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2022
Jim Fairlie
That is exactly the point that I was making—you have hit the nail on the head. In 2001, Scotland had a complete national shutdown because of foot-and-mouth disease, which devastated the industry. I remember that clearly, and it was a living hell. However, in 2007 there was a much smaller outbreak that could be contained in pockets. Is having independence crucial in making such decisions?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2022
Jim Fairlie
Thank you very much for that, Sheila; the evidence that you have given today has been fantastic and hugely helpful. However, I now have about 10 different questions and I will probably not get through them all.
First, I have a constituent whose free-range birds are about six miles away from Loch Leven. He is agitated about having tens of thousands of geese flying across his range daily—they fly across his range to feeding grounds near where I live and back again at night. What can he do with regard to his biosecurity in order to protect his flock? Could he house his birds because of that circumstance, and would that cause him to lose his free range status?