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 2089 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
I am sorry, but I cannot hear you.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
Will the member take an intervention?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
Will the member take an intervention?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
I am pleased that Christine Grahame has lodged amendments 7, 9 and 56, which remove the qualification that the code applies when a dog is acquired to keep as a pet. As highlighted by the committee at stage 1, that could become a loophole for unscrupulous breeders. I urge members to support the amendments.
Amendment 7 agreed to.
Amendment 8 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Amendment 9 moved—[Christine Grahame]—and agreed to.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
The amendments in the group seek to leave out sections 8 to 11 of the bill, which contain the powers to make regulations about the registration of litters, and consequentially to remove references to part 2 from the bill and its long title.
The Scottish Government is pleased that the committee agreed at stage 1 that part 2 of the bill should be removed. I understand that the member in charge of the bill accepts that on the clear understanding that we will continue working with the other Great Britain Administrations to explore improvement of the existing compulsory dog microchipping legislation, and particularly the potential for a single point of access to all dog microchip records to be created across GB and for details of dog breeders to be permanently recorded.
The existing powers to establish registration schemes under section 27 of the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 mean that new primary legislation is not needed to allow us to introduce that registration if circumstances change in the future.
I move amendment 34.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
The amendments address the concern that arose during stage 1 that the bill could be misconstrued as creating a direct legal obligation for the acquirer to create, sign and keep the certificate and to show it to a police officer or inspector if requested. The intention is to make clear that section 4 details what the code of practice must include in relation to the certificate, which we otherwise fully support, but that section 4 does not in itself impose any direct legal obligations on the acquirer or the supplier of a dog.
As the bill does not provide for any sanctions or penalties in the event that a person does not comply with sections 2 to 4, those provisions cannot be enforced directly in practice. I understand that that was the intention when the bill was introduced, and it is recognised in the policy memorandum, which states that the intention is
“to achieve behavioural change, without placing formal legal obligations on the parties involved”.
If amendments 45 and 46 are agreed to, failing to complete and hold a certificate may still be relevant to establishing a liability, as set out in section 6, for the other provisions of the code of practice and it could be taken into account by the relevant enforcement authorities when considering further action under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 or regulations made under that act in individual cases where owners have acted irresponsibly.
The amendments will, however, avoid any misunderstanding or unnecessary anxiety for otherwise law-abiding and responsible owners who might misplace their certificate and be concerned that simply failing to retain a completed certificate to show to a police officer or an inspector would in itself be an offence that could lead to a prosecution.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
I am sorry, but I do not understand where you are going with that.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
I have not considered the matter in relation to wildlife; I am considering it specifically in the case of the bill, which, as we have stated, represents guidance rather than something that we can enforce legally. The requirement to hold a certificate might give people the impression that there is a legal requirement to do so and that they could be prosecuted if they did not have it, which would be unfair to the people whom we are asking to fill out those certificates in the first place, because there is no legal penalty for not having the ability to produce it.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
I have a quote from the committee, which said:
“The Committee also notes, however, Christine Grahame’s objective for the Bill to educate”—
she has clarified that—
“rather than penalise, those acquiring or selling/giving away a dog and agrees with the advisory status of the certificate.”
If amendments 45 and 46 are agreed to, failing to complete and hold a certificate may still be relevant in establishing liability, as set out in section 6, in relation to other provisions of the code of practice, and it could be taken into account by the relevant welfare enforcement authorities. In other words, if someone did not have a certificate, why they did not have one would be a question. Therefore, that gathers evidence for the—
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 18 September 2024
Jim Fairlie
That is from the 2010 code of practice, but we will have a separate entity, which is exactly what you, as the member, have brought forward.
12:00