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 2643 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
Maybe we could wind back a bit. There have been a lot of concerns among certain businesses. You have addressed some of those, but what do you see as the outstanding concerns?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
On the TNUOS review, is it accepted that the locational signals need to change? As far as I can see, the aim with locational signalling at the moment is to build as much generation as possible as close as possible to the theoretical centre of the GB energy market, which I think is Warwick. Last time I looked, building renewable energy close to Warwick was not going to produce as big an efficiency and load factor as building renewables in Scotland. We get more energy out of wind farms in Scotland than we would in the midlands of England. Is it recognised that locational signals need to change now through TNUOS, and that we need to be accessing and developing the resource where it is?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
It is good to see you in front of the committee, minister. I will turn to some of the concerns of environmental stakeholders and how you have addressed those in discussions within the common framework process and come to the decisions that you have, collectively. One of those concerns is around divergence during this delay period.
I understand that the EU is considering, and has taken the first steps towards, phasing out 47 groups of chemicals under its regime but that, under the UK REACH scheme, the UK is considering only three groups in that first phase of considering the environmental health impact of chemicals and how quickly they can be phased out. Do you see the potential for divergence, given the deadlines and the lack of pace of the UK scheme?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
Thanks for that. I have another couple of questions on this.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
That is one area. Are there others?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
But—[Inaudible.]
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 28 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
As you said, it is a transitionary period, which is par for the course with many other DRS schemes. However, if there was a grace period for small producers in the middle of that, what complexity would it cause? For example, if some small distilleries are in the scheme and some are not, a convenience store might have a complex shelf of regional whiskies, with some being in the scheme and some being out of it. How will that work? I appreciate Mr Harris’s point that larger retailers might just say, “Forget this—it’s too much”. What other issues might the grace period create for small producers and those in retail and wholesale?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee
Meeting date: 23 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
Do you feel that, with common frameworks, there is potentially a shift towards more executive power and less transparency? I am speaking in general terms about how common frameworks have operated up to now, particularly in areas that were previously European Union competencies, where there might have been more stakeholder engagement and long processes of policy formulation, whereas now that is potentially more of an area for decisions to be made between Governments.
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee
Meeting date: 23 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
I will stay on that issue of internal market act exemptions. Evidence that has been taken in other committees in Parliament has suggested that the discussion under the common framework on deposit return schemes has been on-going for a long time. To what extent should that whole process be codified and made more transparent, so that all Parliaments could see exactly what the nature of those discussions has been, or would that impact in some way on the nature of the common framework? The common framework seems to be led largely by civil servants. There is ministerial engagement within that, but it is a very evidence-based process. Would a codification of that exemption process have an impact on common frameworks?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee
Meeting date: 23 March 2023
Mark Ruskell
Okay. My last question is about an area on which we have taken quite a lot of evidence, and that is retained EU law. You might have general comments to make on the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill but, specifically within your area of expertise in human rights, are there any potential unintended, or even intended, consequences as a result of the proposed law and the 23 December cliff edge?