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 3379 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
Thank you.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I am picking up the point that there is now consensus on a permitting defence, which would potentially extend to consenting bodies. Everybody would covered by that. Can ecocide still occur, even within that regime? I am aware that there is a provision on overriding public interest in the habitats regulations, which are designed to protect species and habitats. A consenting body can effectively allow environmental damage to occur if it is seen to be in the wider public interest, whether because of climate change or some other issue. Have you considered that? We are considering the creation of a defence for consenting bodies, but a consenting body could intentionally and wilfully allow environmental damage to take place because it is in the wider public interest to do so.
It feels like the ground has shifted a little bit with respect to the bill, which I think is good, given the evidence that we have heard on the impact on consenting bodies and on those that have been granted permits. Within that space, however, I am now wondering whether that has been or needs to be considered.
I hope that that question is clear—it is probably not.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I want to ask you about the stand-alone offence of ecocide. Is there something quite different if somebody is convicted under the heading of ecocide? Leaving aside the penalties, which are obviously a lot higher, is there something quite different between that and a conviction under section 40 of the RRA? Is there a sense that a corporation might be fined or get a heavy penalty under section 40 of the act whereas, to a certain extent, individuals can hide behind that within a corporation? The committee is still trying to wheedle out the real strength of the stand-alone offence, so it would be good to get any reflections that you have on that from your expert working group or from wider consideration, referring to the value of the ecocide offence as compared with what COPFS might pursue through section 40 of the act, if it were to make a choice between one and the other.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
That sounds pretty concrete. If corporations are putting ecocide into their risk registers, that goes right to the top, to board level, and it cuts across their legal fiduciary duties as companies. I am interested in that. Is there any more evidence from the corporate world about how practice is changing as a result of the concept of ecocide?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I guess that it would depend on the event, would it not? If there was a public inquiry into a major catastrophic event, reporting might follow anyway. That is food for thought. Thank you.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
Some of those functions could therefore be co-ordinated at the UK level, but the Scottish Government would seek to input into that process rather than leading on it.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I think that I understand that. We are talking about the waters beyond 200 nautical miles. Is much of the Scottish fleet operating beyond 200 nautical miles? Are we looking mostly at the pelagic sector?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
There are two views on reporting. The Scottish Government would like the reporting requirements to be removed from the bill, but you have received some alternative views. Some stakeholders would like there to be an incident-level reporting provision so that, if an ecocide offence was committed and there was a conviction, there would be some kind of reporting after the incident. What are your views on that?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I think that that is clear.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I agree with most of what the minister has just set out—I think that that should be the process going forward. However, I invite him to consider the quite rare circumstances in which it would make sense to bypass the voluntary control agreement process and allow NatureScot to take action. If the minister is confident that there could not be any circumstance at all where urgent action would need to be taken, I accept his argument. However, if there is any doubt about that, I ask him to have a conversation with me between stage 2 and stage 3 and to think about lodging an amendment in that space that could be better than mine and could leave it open for urgent action to be taken without undermining the important voluntary agreement approach that has been established. We are all behind that approach and wish the minister well with it, but we have concerns in relation to exceptional circumstances.