Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 6 February 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2565 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 September 2025

Bob Doris

Did you want to come back in, convener?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 September 2025

Bob Doris

That is very helpful—thank you. I have no further questions.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 September 2025

Bob Doris

Convener, your questions about prices have made me think about the need to ensure that the market is operating properly for consumers, because the prices that you gave indicate that there could be price gouging in the system. It is necessary for consumers to get a number of quotes to ensure that they get best value.

Do our witnesses have any advice to give to ensure that, as people move to ground-source heat pumps, they are not price gouged by less-than-reputable operators in the market who might wish to extract maximum profit rather than provide public and community benefits?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 September 2025

Bob Doris

I will move on to my second-last question—I want to come back to contingencies after this, convener.

There is a suggestion in my notes that the Climate Change Committee wants to see reduced demand for meat and some dietary change. I would always encourage people to use locally sourced meat with high welfare standards and to buy Scottish, but there will be imports in the meat sector. What contribution could reducing or eliminating the imports make to our net zero ambitions? Could that offset some of the requirements to reduce livestock numbers that have been suggested by the Climate Change Committee?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 2 September 2025

Bob Doris

I have a final question on contingencies. I will not explore the health benefits—we will leave that sitting for the moment.

On carbon budgets and reaching net zero, it is for the Scottish Government to say what its alternative route looks like in relation to peatland and livestock numbers, but you have mentioned contingencies. Will you say a little more about the extent of those contingencies that would have to be exercised to bring the Scottish Government’s policies—such as they are likely to be when the climate change plan is ultimately published—back into line for the balanced pathway to net zero?

Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]

Scottish Commission on Social Security

Meeting date: 26 June 2025

Bob Doris

Good morning, and thank you for joining us. I want to ask a couple of questions about the independent review of SCoSS that took place in 2023, which you mentioned. Before I ask where you are with the recommendations from that review, I should acknowledge that the review found that the work that SCoSS has done is widely recognised as having made a significant improvement to the social security system in Scotland. When I ask, “Where are you with those recommendations?”, that is the context.

I understand that there were 15 recommendations. What progress has been made, to date, in implementing those?

Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]

Scottish Commission on Social Security

Meeting date: 26 June 2025

Bob Doris

That is very helpful. You say that all the recommendations have been implemented, which is positive. I will not pursue the resource issue, because colleagues will do that in later questions. However, I will ask a follow-up question on one recommendation that you did not mention, just to get on the record where we are with it. Recommendation 10 says:

“SCoSS should consider reviewing their stakeholder engagement strategy once the new Chair and Board members take up post.”

Just briefly, because I know that we are short of time for our first evidence session this morning, what was the outcome of that? It would be good to know that. There was also a recommendation for a further review in 2027-28. Are you already sighting what you would like that to focus on in particular?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Bob Doris

Convener, this is quite a complex area, and you have some lived experience due to your professional background outwith the Parliament. You suggest that a multiplier of 15 should be used for compensation. What is the basis for that, other than your gut feeling and experience? Is it based on consultation with landlords or with tenants? What is the evidence base for that suggestion? The Government has done a lot of work on the issue so, as a committee member, I wonder why a multiplier of 15 would be better than looking at the increase in the capital value. How did you arrive at that multiplier? I am asking so that I can think about it ahead of stage 3.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 18 June 2025

Bob Doris

I am sorry, but I am not going to take another intervention from Ms Hamilton. We are talking about her amendment.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 18 June 2025

Bob Doris

Rachael Hamilton mentions that 12,000 people have expressed their views. A land management plan would put a statutory duty on the landowner—in this case, the business that she has mentioned—to actively consult with all those people while drawing up a new and fresh land management plan. In an earlier contribution, Ms Hamilton said that, although we have an ethical investment framework, it is clearly not working, so there should be some form of enforcement. At the committee’s previous meeting, we agreed to amendments that will increase to £50,000 the maximum fine for non-compliance with land management plans, but Conservative colleagues tried to reduce it to just £500. What is Rachael Hamilton’s position on that?