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 1570 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
That would be useful.
Equally, there is no defence in the bill that would apparently prevent a regulator or consenting body from being held liable for ecocide. Again, as mentioned by Murdo MacLeod, that is in contrast to the 2014 act, which sets out defences on the side of the regulator and on the side of the operator for authorised acts. Should regulators be protected from liability for environmental harm when issuing consents under the relevant legislation, or are there instances where a regulator should be held liable?
I have to say that certain aspects of this issue have caused quite a lot of consternation as our hearings have gone on, certainly leading to food for thought for the likes of councillors who serve on planning committees. We will start with Rachael Weir this time.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
I am sure that Iain Batho is going to tell me exactly the same thing.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
Okay, thanks.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
Thank you very much, convener, and good morning.
The bill does not explicitly set out that undertaking licensed or consented activities cannot constitute ecocide or provide a defence along those lines. Different sectors have raised a number of concerns about that, including in evidence during our hearings on the bill from representatives of farming, fishing and renewables. Is the approach in the bill appropriate? What are the implications for regulatory certainty? I will go to Clare Moran first.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
But it would be fair to say that the bill provides no comfort for consenters.
I have one final question, convener. Murdo MacLeod mentioned that this Parliament is currently looking at the Dog Theft (Scotland) Bill. The stealing of dogs is already a criminal offence, as we all know. That makes me wonder whether we get our legislative priorities right as a Parliament. There have been indications today from the panel that, rather than pass this new bill, one of the options would be to go back and look at the 2014 act, and maybe change aspects of it, including the possibility of increasing sentences under that act. Is it fair to say that, Iain?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
How have they dealt with the issue in other jurisdictions?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
I will leave it there. Thank you.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
As we have been sitting here, as always, I have been doing a bit of research, which some folk find annoying. Some people think that MSPs shouldna be on phones, laptops or Surfaces while we are in committees or debates, yet you guys have said that we should be doing our own research all of the time, and I would agree with that.
Sarah Ronald, there is a phrase on your website:
“millions of people struggle with services that weren’t built with them in mind”.
Some would argue that a lot of services delivered by the Government and by the public sector more widely are delivered without people in mind, and you have given some examples today. Seth, you are obviously heavily involved in public sector work, and Sarah, you have told us that you have avoided it. Peter, you have given us examples of where you think it is going wrong and you have highlighted lack of innovation, risk aversion, single-year budgets and, in some cases, overregulation. One of your examples was about NHS procurement and having to deal with the territorial health boards and the other boards, too.
11:30One of those boards, of course, is NHS National Services Scotland, which is supposed to help with those procurements. Could AI be used to make that procurement process better? Could AI be used to get what everybody wants but instead of that argument taking place during the course of the procurement, all of that is done and dusted beforehand because of the use of AI? Are there opportunities there where we could get many more bangs for our buck, better procurements and, at the end of it, better services for people?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
Peter, I want to go back to your point about your interaction with the health service and the 12-page diagnosis letter that you whittled down to three using AI—and the fact that the doctor said that you were so well informed. I am playing devil’s advocate here, because the health service—and even some MSPs at points—are overburdened by folk who diagnose themselves. Some folk do suffer from hypochondria. How do we get over the fact that folk like that may use AI systems and then appear at public services or even private companies and say, “Look, this is where I am at. Do something about it”?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Kevin Stewart
Let us stick with planning. Singapore was mentioned as being at the forefront of the use of technology. Singapore has used what Peter Proud describes as its data lake to ensure that it has the right planning for the future. We are not at that level yet. Are we making best use of the massive amount of data that we have? Are we using our data lake to our advantage? How could we do that as quickly as the likes of Singapore? What do we need to do?