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 409 contributions
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
I will pick up on what Esme Clelland said in her exchange with my colleague Mark Griffin.
It was interesting that Esme mentioned that point 1 of NPF4 is about the nature and biodiversity crises. No one is going to argue against that, but NPF4 was developed before a housing emergency was declared. She also mentioned that “hierarchy” is not the right word to use. We want to manage nature and biodiversity while ensuring that people have safe, secure and affordable homes. We need to look at the issues in that context. That is an important consideration when it comes to how we look at NPF4.
My first question relates to the adoption of NPF4. A lot of associated advice and guidance has been produced—some of which has been implemented, but some of it has not—and we have had working groups. What impact has that had on the ability of communities to engage meaningfully with the planning system?
I will start with you, Esme, because I picked up on the point that you made. Is NPF4 helping or hindering the development of local place plans?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
Perhaps that is a question that we should take to the minister.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
Yes, because it is right that we consider the letter in relation to what we are doing here.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
I was intrigued to learn that Homes for Scotland has asked for a minimum target to be established of 25,000 new homes to be built each year. Could you expand a little on that minimum target, Kevin? What would it mean in the context of the housing emergency, which we have been speaking about this morning? What about the practical side of things? How could that target be achieved?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
I highlight the concerns that were raised in the Social Justice and Social Security Committee on amendment 230. We were considering Bob Doris’s amendment as part of a series of other amendments lodged by other colleagues on that committee, and we had to wait for the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee before we were able to hear the debate surrounding it.
I fully support the amendment, but I have to question the process, given that it was not considered as part of the homelessness prevention work that was undertaken by the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. That is more of a reflective comment than anything else, but I am glad that we are here now and are able to discuss it—although it has been a very long time coming, and the direction that the Parliament has taken has not been good for stakeholders’ morale, as they have had to wait for so long before we have been able to discuss the amendment today.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
My comments relate to a wider issue; they are on the letter that we received from Mary McIntosh. She is from my area, and she was present during the evidence sessions regarding this matter. If we approve the revised statement today, does that mean that we will have to send her a response? My concern is that she has a bee in her bonnet about this issue.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
Hazel, will you touch on local place plans in the round?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
I move on to the interpretation of NPF4—specifically, the never-ending debate on 20-minute neighbourhoods and the stifling impact that those can have on potential development in remote and rural areas. Are 20-minute neighbourhoods achievable? Why is development being stifled, and how might that be overcome?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
Hazel or Esme, does either of you have any comments on 20-minute neighbourhoods?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Meghan Gallacher
There is an issue about community understanding of what NPF4 is. We have discussed a lot the idea of engaging with communities directly so that they know that they can advocate. At the same time, they know their areas, as you rightly said. However, there is still a lack of understanding of what NPF4 means and how people can get involved in that process.
Kevin, from a developer point of view—we have communities, but we also have developers—when it comes to local place plans, is the guidance creating a confused landscape?