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 1908 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 9 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Okay.
I will go back to another question that the convener asked, in which he was essentially railing against Government waffle on page 7 of the briefing.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 9 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Is the chief entrepreneur, Mark Logan, involved in all this?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
If Mr Doris is prepared to clear up the point, I will give way again.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
I am always happy to have conversations with Ms Lennon—she knows that. I was going to say that if we are to take the pragmatic approach suggested by Ms Boyack—I am a pragmatist—the committee would go for one year rather than six months. If I had a preference, it would be for a year, but others might have a different view.
Maurice Golden invites us to agree that the circular economy strategy should be co-designed with the public sector, private sector and third sector bodies. I was a little surprised that Mr Golden used that awful phrase “co-design”, which is so favoured by those who want to sound well-meaning but do not really mean it. He is not in that camp at all, being a circular economy titan. Phraseology aside, he is right to say that the production of any such strategy should not be left to ministers and civil servants alone.
I turn to my good friend Bob Doris, whose amendment 187, which was absolutely fascinating, also suggests people who should be consulted. I am not really sure what the amendment means by “relevant policy makers” or “human right defenders”, which could mean almost anyone, but its call for
“environmental experts from the Global South”
to be included has me most foxed. Mr Doris has not really cleared that up, because he does not—
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Will the member take an intervention?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
As Sarah Boyack just said, I have a couple of amendments in the group to section 3 of the bill, which is “Publication and laying of strategy”. The bill says that
“Ministers must ... publish the circular economy strategy ... and ... lay a copy of”
it “before the ... Parliament” within “2 years” of section 3 coming into force. In my view, that displays a lack of ambition and a pace of working that really should have no place in Government. It is real life-in-the-slow-lane stuff and it is not good enough. I am sure that the minister who is now in charge of the bill would agree with me on that—I hope so.
Amendments 2 and 3 are alternatives to each other. They would reduce that rather ponderous timescale to either one year or six months and I invite committee members to take their pick. Committee members could, if they wish, revert to the old Lorna Slater timetable, or they could choose to turbo-boost the bill under the dynamism of Gillian Martin; I hope that she proves me right on that.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Clare Adamson made that point powerfully, and it is why she should move her amendment 211—or, if she does not, why somebody else should move it. We must do better on e-bike batteries and the second-hand market. It is not just about fire safety. That is important, but there is also the question of how we reuse products. I cannot say strongly enough that Clare Adamson really should move her amendment. I know that she is probably not going to, but somebody else should, because it is so important.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Will the member take an intervention?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
The problem is that I am not clear what the policy intent is behind Bob Doris’s amendment. I really am not. I am pretty sure that other committee members who have been listening as closely as I have will also be unclear about that. However, we can be clear that, were we to agree to the amendment—I am pleased to hear that Mr Doris is minded not to move it, but we will discover that later—we could end up in a situation in which ministers have a huge list of people and a long list of countries across the globe with which they are expected to consult. I just think that that would be completely impractical. I am pretty sure that the minister would say that as well. Hopefully, Mr Doris will not move amendment 187.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Graham Simpson
Just for clarity, I point out that Maurice Golden’s amendment 151 would not require ministers to set up a new body; the actual wording is that they must “designate” a body as an advisory body. I have heard what the minister has had to say, but is she against the principle of having such an advisory body?