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 ˿ and committees will automatically update to show only the ˿ and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of ˿ and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of ˿ 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 2063 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
I actually want to address my question to Gordon Martin and Kevin Lindsay. It is about the changes in station staffing and whether they have implications for managing antisocial behaviour. In particular, I was thinking about situations where a lone worker is managing a station with reduced hours and reduced staffing and how that works in antisocial behaviour hotspots at particular stations. A bit of an insight on that from the rail industry would be useful.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
I have a question about the target areas that are not included in the bill. The advisory group originally recommended targets on positive outcomes for biodiversity from public sector and Government policy—for example, on investment in nature. Do you have a view on those areas? Do you already set targets in those areas?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
Does Mark Lodge have anything to add?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
The bill will change the duty on relevant public bodies. Currently, they have to “have regard to” national park plans, which will shift towards a duty to “facilitate the implementation of” the plans. I am interested in the perspectives of all three of you about what might change as a result of that.
Grant, I am aware of the long and difficult history with Highlands and Islands Enterprise in relation to the management of Cairngorm mountain. I am aware that there might be tensions in relation to Forestry and Land Scotland and that there are definitely tensions in the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park and perhaps further afield. What will change as a result of the wording changing from “have regard to” to “facilitate the implementation of”?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
How will that change the dynamic in relation to HIE specifically? In your example, you are talking about areas in which there is already a degree of consensus—changes that need to happen with deer management—so you are pushing public agencies to deliver similar objectives. I am interested in the areas in which there might be tension between a commercial interest and the aims of the park. Will the change in the law change that dynamic?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
Mark, what does this look like from a local authority perspective?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
Okay. Grant Moir, do you have any desire for extra powers?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
Do you already report to your board on areas such as the understanding of citizens and society? Are they already key performance areas in the park?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
Will the provision implicitly change the status of the park plan? For the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park, for example, what would come first: the park plan or Forestry and Land Scotland’s plan for its own estate within the park? Which will have primacy?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Mark Ruskell
On the back of that, I am interested to know whether you think that there should be some form of non-regression provision in the bill. We might be talking about a vulnerable species with a poor conservation status, and there might be a very restricted range—it might be the last habitat. It would seem that a non-regression provision could apply quite well in such situations. What Grant Moir is describing is more of a landscape-scale restoration scenario whereby there is a need for flexibility around different habitats and species. Is there a bottom line, and does the bill get it right? Should there be something in the bill that articulates non-regression in a way that protects the bottom line for species recovery?