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 łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees will automatically update to show only the łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of łÉČËżěĘÖ 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 498 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
To be blunt, we cannot go far on the petition, but some avenues to explore that might be helpful to the petitioner include writing to the Scottish Retail Consortium to find out what its member supermarkets’ position is on pregnant women accessing disabled spaces or parent-and-child spaces on their premises.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
Picking up on the issue of improvements and upgrades and your point about facilitating what might be called internal trade, I note that we already have major choke points when drivers get to the M77, particularly around junctions 1 and 2, and that is before drivers access either the M8 to get to West Lothian or the M74. What assessment of positive developments downstream is made of the impact of connectivity beyond that? Do you see what I mean?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
Thank you—it is useful to get that on the record.
Earlier, you mentioned the existence of different views, and that is one aspect of PE1967, which supports the high road option. I note the correspondence from the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority about that.
Could you take us through the timeline for the upgrade? Is there anything that you would like to put on the record in relation to the high road option?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
I agree with Mr Ewing. I think that it would be useful to ask the Government to tell us in its response about some of the informal engagement mechanisms—Mr Ewing mentioned some of the formal aspects—to encourage overall community benefit. The petition is relatively narrow, but making shared ownership mandatory, although it could affect the asset base for some wind farm developers, could be in the wider scope of community benefit that would meet some of the petitioner’s requests. It would be useful to get on record what the overall approach to community benefit in the round would be, particularly as we do not know when the Scottish Government’s energy strategy will be published.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
The increased traffic flow into the M77 will be problematic, if you are up in Newton Mearns, and it is already clogged around Silverburn and those areas. There might then be a petition saying that we need to upgrade the M77. I wonder how you model, or look at, the impact beyond the upgrades at hand, if you like.
10:00Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
Jackson Carlaw remembers. [Laughter.]
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
We move slightly closer to home, I suppose. The petition calls on the Scottish Government to protect Loch Lomond’s Atlantic oakwood shoreline by implementing the high road option for the A82 upgrade between Tarbet and Inverarnan, which is one of three options that Transport Scotland considered during early project assessment.
In correspondence to the committee on 19 March this year, the petitioners stated:
“We are demanding Transport for Scotland conducts a full STAG Appraisal of the A82 Tarbet to Inverarnan Project as required by Law.”
Cabinet secretary, what assurance can you offer that Transport Scotland has fully complied with its legal obligations?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
Thank you, cabinet secretary.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
On the A77 trunk road between the Whitletts roundabout in Ayr and the Cairnryan ports—approximately 44 miles of single-carriageway road—how do you respond to the concerns highlighted by the petitioners that the current state of the A77 is detrimental to trade with Northern Ireland and has left residents of the south-west feeling “abandoned” by the Scottish Government?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Maurice Golden
I echo Mr Ewing’s comments. As part of the response, it would be useful for the petitioner and, indeed, the Parliament to understand what the Scottish Government’s position is on the codification and enablement of international law in a devolved setting. The Scottish Government has a position on alignment with European Union law, but I am unclear as to how international law in the devolved setting is to be adhered to.
I am not asking for that information treaty by treaty, but I note that, tomorrow, the Parliament has a debate about how the Aarhus convention of 1998 is being enabled in a devolved context. It would be useful to know the Government’s overall approach to the issue. I have concerns that it might not be practical for the Scottish Government to adhere to the timescales requested by the petitioner, but it would be interesting to know what the overall trajectory is.