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 488 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
I think so, but it leads me on to what is quite a concerning aspect of this issue. How can communities make an assessment of whether they want something when that thing is not defined? For some people, it would be beneficial if the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park did not have the Loch Lomond Shores centre, while others might want something of that scale, because of the economic benefits. By the time that you have layered on proposals on climate change and biodiversity, there might be a number of quite compelling but competing visions for what the Galloway national park would do.
Did you consider doing the consultation in two parts, first, by gaining views, and, secondly, by showcasing those views to communities so that they could decide what might be delivered as a result? Does that make sense?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
I am a little bit concerned about closing the petition when we have not yet seen the guidance that the Scottish Government has published. We could write to the Minister for Public Finance to seek further information on when that guidance will be published, an update on work to progress proposals for raising the current 50MW threshold to allow planning authorities to determine more applications for onshore wind farms, and more information on what consideration the Scottish Government has given to ensuring that support is available to members of the public who wish to participate in public inquiries.
I fear that we are reaching the end of our involvement with the petition, but there are still some actions that we could undertake.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
Thanks for that. With onshore wind projects, for example, we have found that Scotland is broadly supportive of them until they are close by. It might be quite interesting to consider that same element in any further research on national parks.
Obviously, the consultation period is just starting, but I am interested in the vision for Galloway national park, in particular, and in how communities can assess whether they want it for their area. Is the vision very similar to those of the existing national parks, or is it slightly different?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
I repeat that the NFUS has said that
“existing national parks have failed to make a positive contribution to farming and crofting.”
What is different about the proposed Galloway national park that will change that, or will farmers and crofters in Galloway make the same assessment?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
I have a final question. NatureScot’s website says that
“farmers and crofters do not face any additional bureaucracy within National Parks”
and that they can receive additional support. However, NFU Scotland has said that the majority of its members feel that
“existing national parks have failed to make a positive contribution to farming and crofting.”
What is your response to those concerns?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
Thank you, convener, and I welcome the witnesses to the meeting.
I will start at the beginning. When the existing national parks were assessed, what sort of evidence was sought or research conducted to inform whether a new park should be put in place?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Maurice Golden
I am slightly confused. Is the consultation about various iterations of the Galloway national park, including its geography and the infrastructure that it might house, or is the consultation about whether the park should or should not go ahead?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Maurice Golden
Thanks for that. I am having an issue with the response to local community demand. There does not need to be an exact blueprint, but there should be a vision or an indication of what that might look like.
John, you take a wider view on national parks. More generally, can you see there being a blueprint for a national park that differs from the two existing ones that we have, or do you think that that is naturally where it would broadly lead to? On the Galloway park specifically, what might that look like and how might it be presented to local communities to allow them to make an assessment of whether they want it?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Maurice Golden
As we know, diversification gets into tourism, about which we have heard, wind turbines, solar farms, battery storage—yes, okay. Back to you, convener.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Maurice Golden
Which is fine, as long as you do not state that one of your aims is response to local community demand. If it is a policy decision that this must happen, that is up to the Scottish Government, but you cannot then say that it is because the community supports it, I would argue. It reeks a bit of George Orwell’s “1984”. Ian McKinnon, would you like to come in?