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 3294 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
On land management plans, I am interested in getting your views on what good consultation actually looks like. As Jon Hollingdale has pointed out, we already have forest strategies; there is also a forest licensing process that communities input to and there are local place plans.
09:45Is there good practice when it comes to meaningful consultation in which communities feel that they are actually participating in decisions, instead of just being asked, “What do you think of this?”
Is there a risk that the bill will set up a tick-box exercise? How can we make the process appropriate, meaningful and participative, so that communities actually feel that their objectives are being met?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
How should good practice be codified? Should it be in the legislation or in guidance, or should we expect that to evolve?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
Jon Hollingdale, do you want to come in?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
Jon Hollingdale, do you want to come in?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
We have discussed sites of community significance. When Josh Doble mentioned that, I could not help thinking about the Taymouth castle estate. It is relatively small, but there is a huge amount of community interest in the assets, and other such examples have been mentioned in evidence. Is there a way in which we can define such things in the bill? It feels as though it is open to a lot of interpretation, but a way forward could be to say, “This is a hugely significant asset to the community, so aspects of the bill should apply”. I am tempted to go along that line, but I am interested in how we would define it. As with the definition of “community”, we could get into a bit of a grey area.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
So that is reflected in planning legislation.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
Okay. The committee has another question in relation to the minimum threshold for prohibiting and notifying land transfers—
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
I ask the panel to hold that thought. We will come back to it.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
Amendment 11 seeks to tighten up the language from an amendment by Maurice Golden that was agreed to at stage 2. That amendment required ministers to set out their response to failing to meet a carbon budget. I agree that that is needed and I sought to make a similar change at stage 2 to a different part of the bill. I accept the Government’s preference for achieving the intention through section 35B reports; there is a strong logic behind doing so.
Amendment 11 adds to the text from Maurice Golden that was accepted; it adds that ministers’ reports must set out the policy changes that will be made in response to a carbon budget not being met. That will ensure that ministers set out more detail about how they will respond and the changes that will be implemented using the most up-to-date data on Scotland’s emissions reduction.
I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for constructive discussions on the issue. I think that the amendment improves the bill’s transparency and it will improve committee scrutiny and public awareness.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 5 November 2024
Mark Ruskell
I join other members in thanking the clerks, SPICe and the witnesses, who helped us to deal with what has been an incredibly rushed parliamentary process for the bill. I also thank the cabinet secretary and her officials for their constructive engagement, over the past couple of weeks in particular, as we tried to make sense of the amendments that we could lodge in the time that we had available.
We are five years on from the Parliament’s declaration of a climate emergency and 15 years on from the setting of those first important targets. However, there has been a failure to take early action to meet those targets. The cabinet secretary is right to say that there is consensus in the Parliament on the importance of tackling climate change and on the targets, but there has not been consensus on the importance of taking immediate action to tackle the crisis. That is what we need to build as we go forward. In this debate, there has been the beginning of an understanding of our failure in not taking action, but we need to move forward in that regard.