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 2133 contributions
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Okay. Thank you for that.
In response to one of the questions, you mentioned community wealth building. There was some evidence given to the committee that the definition of that in NPF4 is a little bit lacking in clarity, and perhaps it is not so well understood in planning circles, even now. Can you say a wee bit more about how you might address that and whether you agree with the concerns and issues that have been raised in order to make it clearer for everyone?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Thank you very much for that. I hope that I can come back in later, convener.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey
That is the very issue that I find difficult. An old building in a town such as Kilmarnock, for example, will have had several purposes over many years. There might be an application to use it for some new purpose or other that elected members or the citizens of the town collectively do not agree with. Planners feel impeded in changing their mind if a particular change of use has already been provided for. How do we inject into NPF4 a sense that people might think differently about what a town should be and what a building should be used for? I do not see that in NFP4 and, having discussed those issues with local planners, I do not think that they feel that they have the ability to do that. Therefore, who should do it? Should it be Professor Hague’s proposed citizen stakeholder group pushing from the bottom up, or should it be some other mechanism? That is what I am trying to get to.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
You both mentioned the local development plans. Is there a pressing urgency for local planning authorities to review their LDPs, particularly when the new NPF4 might include references that are perhaps not contained in their current LDPs? Do the planning authorities need to revise and review those as soon as they can?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Thank you. Robbie, do you have anything to add?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey
It was on local development plans. Is there a pressing urgency for the planning authorities to revise those plans to get them into fit enough local shape? There are provisions in the new NPF4 that will impact on the local development plans.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Thank you. I love that phrase “souls on fire”. We need many more of them locally and across Scotland.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Good morning. I am glad that the witnesses have widened out the discussion. I was hopeful that some of the issues that concern me as a local member and have done for many years would be solved in NPF4, and I would like to get your views on whether they are.
Professor Hague talked about things such as derelict buildings, empty shops and offshore retail owners, and the inability to reach out to those bits of society to get them to play their part. I very much hoped that NPF4 would enable us to deal with some of that. If you look around any city, town or village in Scotland, you will see examples all over the place of urban dereliction and decay, abandoned shops, abandoned land, absentee owners and absentee shareholders, whoever they may be.
I thought to myself, “What is the role for NPF4 in addressing that big issue, because it is what matters to the citizens in my constituency?” Professor Hague talked about perhaps having citizen stakeholders to get a bottom-up approach and solution to the issue. Was it too much to expect NPF4 to address that? What could we do additionally to help NPF4 to deal with that problem in the urban setting?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Willie Coffey
Jane Fowler, do you have anything to add?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Willie Coffey
That brings me to my final question on the matter, which is about consistency. You might have heard me asking the previous panel of witnesses how we get a consistent approach right across Scotland without a national approach. I do not think that they were totally clear in what their views were on that. I am really concerned about it, and I appreciate that it is at the heart of the bill. How do we ensure that we get a nationally consistent level of quality in services but retain the existing services—you mentioned East Ayrshire—that are already delivering a first-class service? How do we ensure that we do both?