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 399 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
Actually, convener, can I come in later with question 17? I think that my supplementary question relates to that.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
So, it is purely about that flexibility.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
Minister, you are right to say that there is a fair bit of good will out there at the moment. However—and this follows on from Mark Ruskell’s question—we have heard in evidence that there is a bit of uncertainty about the vagueness of the phrase “nature restoration”. How do you intend the guidance to give clarity about what that means and in what circumstances it might be used?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
My understanding of the bill is that NatureScot must “have regard to” the code of practice. There have been some queries about whether that is a fair or strong enough term. What are your thoughts on that?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
If stakeholders do not feel that that is the case, why would you not consider slightly strengthening that wording in the bill?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
It is important to place on record that you foresee that dialogue and that relationship happening. You have already said as much, but I just want the point to be clarified.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
I have a final question, because I know that we need to move on.
I accept that point but, as I said in connection with the REACH example, which SPICe helpfully pointed out, there are other methods of doing that that do not specifically involve non-regression.
That takes me back to the question that I asked a second ago. It will be unhelpful if we do not talk about this again until all the amendments come flying in at stage 2. I presume that, over the coming weeks, you will have a discussion with your team about how you can widen the approach—I do not know whether you have had that conversation yet. I think that, based on the evidence that we have taken, that is what we are generally looking for. If you can come back to the committee with information about what you could do, that would be useful, because it would give us time to think about it.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
I am conscious of the time, but I want to quickly touch on an issue. My understanding is that, if there is a control scheme in place, it is registered against the title to the land. We have heard in evidence that that could potentially create a burden on the land, which would transfer if it were sold. Have you given any thought to the potential effects on land value and marketability?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
Rather than go down the non-regression route, REACH offers a slightly different route, which has a very clearly defined scope for the core aims and protected provisions and how the powers can be used. What is your current thinking about how you might adapt that part of the bill to better reflect the evidence that we have heard?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Tim Eagle
Good morning. I want to go back to Evelyn Tweed’s point about the duty on public bodies. Something that was just expressed and which has been picked up on a lot in evidence is that the duty has just not worked—it has not been taken forward in the way that we wanted.
I am conscious—I think that this is hot off the press—that the Environment (Principles, Governance and Biodiversity Targets) (Wales) Bill has recently been introduced. That bill has some interesting ideas about how—I have written it down—the Welsh Government will create a statement that will inform public bodies how they have to comply with the duty. The bill will give the Welsh Government the power to designate a public body to meet a particular target, impact, or whatever it might be. Did you have any cross-Government discussions with the Welsh Government on what it is doing? Are those things that you might consider doing here, in Scotland?