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 2665 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
First, I presume that you are talking about—I do not know how we should address one another in this committee, convener, so I apologise if it was wrong to say “you”. I presume that the member is talking about the press release relating to advice in 2023.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
That related to 2023.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
If we are talking about the same thing, it was a press release that was put out about guidance or advice that was given to ministers in 2023. I was not the minister then; I am a different minister, and this is a different Government.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
No, it doesn’t.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
We are content that we are compliant with the requirements of the law as it currently stands. I should also make the point that the protection of property rights under protocol 1 of article 1 of the European convention on human rights is not absolute. However, I am content that we are more than covered with regard to the information that you are talking about, which came out in the press release.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
The whole point of this is that we are still looking for voluntary agreements when there is an intervention to be made. It is about going through the whole process before we get to an enforcement order, which is what I presume that you are asking about.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
Yes, I am.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
I absolutely accept stakeholders’ concerns on the issue, but let us be absolutely clear: such an intervention will happen only after NatureScot has gone through a considerable period of asking for voluntary agreements to get to a collective agreement. The role of deer management groups will be very important, but when a specific and targeted plan is being introduced on a piece of land or an estate and a very high density of deer is preventing the development, restoration or whatever it is from being done on the piece of land, then, yes, it is appropriate to ask the neighbours to play their part. The intervention will come in when a neighbour simply refuses to take part in the conversation.
We need to get to a position at which deer numbers come down to allow the peatland or forestry restoration, or whatever is in the specific plan that has been laid out, to happen. The plan cannot just be someone saying, “I want to rewild that.” The action must be part of a particular plan, such as a biodiversity or climate plan—we have a range of plans in place—that is set out, that is deliverable and that people have been consulted on. It is reasonable to ask people to get deer numbers down to allow the specific restoration event to happen.
That does not mean that those deer numbers cannot go back up. I absolutely accept how some people feel, and I have heard the phrase, “We’ll be shooting ourselves out of a job.” However, I do not believe that that will be the case. We have massive numbers of deer. Edward Mountain spoke earlier about deer having to come down from the hill to get the better grass at the bottom of the road. There is scope to allow us to ensure that we can require a landowner to cut their deer numbers to allow a particular piece of work to happen.
Mr Ruskell asks us to go even further and not to even have voluntary engagement. I think that the current provision is absolutely reasonable, because we have a very high deer population. I take the point that was made this morning that we have a national vision and a local vision, and I understand all that, but, if something needs to happen in a local area, then, yes, an intervention is appropriate. That does not mean that the population of deer would necessarily have to be the same in five or 10 years.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
That is absolutely fine. We have all night.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Jim Fairlie
That is exactly what Ross Ewing did in the press release that he put out. I find it astounding that you are prepared to go down that road.
First, you know as well as I do that you can go out with 10 bikes and 50 dogs but you will not round up deer and manage them in the same way as you can manage sheep; whereas you can certainly manage sheep with a couple of shepherds and dogs and get them off that land. I am astounded that you are taking that position of pitting one land manager against another. Deer are a naturally roving and marauding animal. Sheep can be managed as livestock. I find it unbelievable that you could go down that road. However, that is entirely up to you.