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 3627 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Are we generally agreed, then?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Are members content to proceed on that basis?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
The petition will stay open. We will write as suggested by Mr Stewart and consider the petition again in due course.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
I am grateful for that exposition. It seems like a commendable action that we could take in relation to the Scottish Government.
Is there also a way forward for us on Mr Sweeney’s suggestion? Would it involve our writing to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and finding out what enforcement takes place? I know from wearing a different hat in relation to showpeople that councils’ approaches to this matter can be highly individual and variable in the extreme. I do not know whether there would be a common response, but it might be interesting to find out how those matters are being approached and dealt with.
Does the committee agree to keep the petition open, move forward on those two streams and see what further information comes to us?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Have charges led to successful convictions in Northern Ireland and England under the specific provisions of those acts?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Paul Sweeney, who is online, will ask a couple of questions.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
As a committee, we might be ready to agree that we will keep the petition open until, at the very least, we have a preferred route identified and some understanding of the timetable and financial underpinning of the recommended solution. Are members content to do that, and to follow up on Mr Stewart’s suggestion?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
I thank the petitioner for raising the issue. I am only sorry that I do not know whether, ultimately, we got the satisfaction that he might have hoped to get. However, we have NatureScot’s assurances on record. Obviously, it is open to individuals who feel that the provisions are not being honoured to lodge another petition in future.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
PE1895, which was lodged by Gary Wall, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to make it mandatory for NatureScot to explain its conservation objectives in decision making within the framework of the “Scottish Regulators’ Strategic Code of Practice” and the Scottish Government’s guidance “Right First Time: A practical guide for public authorities in Scotland to decision-making and the law”.
We last considered the petition on 18 May, at which point we agreed to write to NatureScot to ask how it ensures that the process for licensing refusals and reasons for refusal are clear and consistent. Its response states that the approach is
“in accordance with legislation following internal policy and procedures”,
and that a record of all assessments is kept. NatureScot says that, in cases of refusal, a discussion takes place with the licensing manager and the unit manager is informed. It states that the applicants are
“clearly informed in writing of the reasons for refusal.”
The petitioner’s recent submission to the committee reiterates his experience of a licence refusal where a conservation objective was not stated in the refusal explanation. He also states his view that the complaints procedure is not impartial, as it is conducted by NatureScot staff.
Do members have any comments or suggestions?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 9 November 2022
Jackson Carlaw
I am sorry—I do not mean to quantify it in this way—but I am interested in whether the practice in England and Wales comes down to a compensation order in the same way that we have here.