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 225 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
I do not want to come off as negative this morning, minister—I agree with you on some of this stuff, but I want to press you on the clarity and detail of the vision. The list of measures under tier 2 is expansive, and one of the arguments against the current greening model is that it is restrictive. In my head, I have the old land managers options scheme, whereby people could pick and choose what worked for them, exactly as you said. Do you have an idea of how those measures will be delivered in the new model?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
Can I ask one more quick question?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
Okay. I just wanted to make sure.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
In fairness, I think that Rhoda Grant said at the very beginning of her question that none of us doubts the outcome that we are trying to get—which is incentivising business, helping us to be more sustainable and so on—and that it is just about how it works in practice and making sure that it becomes not a burden to the agriculture industry but, rather, a positive thing. It is important to monitor that all the way through.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
Perhaps I have not explained myself well. My point is about the rural support plan, not about the detail. I thought that the idea behind the rural support plan was that it would underpin all the new grant schemes and that it would be a document that showed the Scottish Government’s outcomes so that farmers could apply for support that fits the outcomes that you are looking for. Without that document, it feels as if we cannot do that, because your route map does not give that level of detail.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
I—
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
Just for the record—I think that you nodded—will you confirm that there will definitely be no penalty in 2025 and that there would just be a warning letter.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
Excellent.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
I get that and I am very sympathetic to it; it is a much better way of doing things. It is good to get clarity that that is the vision.
This is a technical point: we have had NVZs—nitrate vulnerable zones—for years and we have had to work out calculations about them. That was based on the fact that, in the old days, fertiliser was cheap, huge amounts of fertilising went on and there was pollution of water courses. That is not so true now. Is the code of practice likely to supersede the NVZ system? I imagine that the code of practice will say something about nutrient management. Is that system outdated now, or are you likely to continue NVZs in the future?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 February 2025
Tim Eagle
I am sorry to have to come back in, but this is an important point. I am glad that you said that the arrangements are messy; I think that they are a bit messy, too.
Tiers 1 to 4 are the future. When we talk about legacy schemes, we are talking about the basic payment scheme, but we are actually transitioning that to the future, which tiers 1 to 4 model. I am assuming that tiers 1 to 4 are not just there until 2028 but that that is the model that we will run forward with until 2032. The SSIs that will be considered in the autumn are actually about the future.
I want to return to why the matter is crucially important. Let us take a practical example. You are bringing out a £20 million scheme this year using the Bew moneys, which you have replaced. John Swinney seemed to suggest that that would be about sustainable and regenerative farming, but you have not produced anything that tells us what farmers might think is the right thing to apply for under that scheme.
09:30The Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 says that the rural support plan must set out
“any measures that are intended to benefit small producers, tenant farmers and crofters”.
However, I have organisations telling me that they do not really know how the Scottish suckler beef support scheme fits them as small producers or how the whole-farm plan is going to work for a smaller-than-usual producer.
What about capping and front loading? Those questions came up during discussion of the agriculture legislation, but we still have not answered them. ARIOB is a group that you are quite proud of, but I worry about ARIOB because I do not want it to be a clique; I want it to be an expansive group that really works for the whole industry rather than for the few people who are on that group. ARIOB has been in place since 2021, so I could ask what it has been doing for almost four years. We should surely have the detail by now so that we are clear, and so that farmers across the industry are clear, about what comes next.
Finally, you suggested that you think that farmers, crofters and smallholders are clear. I think that some feel that they are clear, but the impression that I get when I go out is that that is certainly not what is thought across the industry.
It was surely your original vision that the rural support plan would have come out by now, in order for us to have all of these things ready before we start talking about the proper transition from 2026.