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 1931 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 25 June 2024
Monica Lennon
There is a lot of agreement on this group, and we certainly support all the amendments in it. My amendment 77 seeks to mirror my earlier amendment 72, which was already debated in group 2 and agreed to. Amendment 77 is about ensuring that the application of due diligence in relation to environmental protection and human rights is exercised in supply chains. That would ensure that those issues are taken into account when ministers produce secondary legislation, and it would provide consistency between sections 1(3) and 6(2), for the same reasons that I set out earlier.
I thank members for their comments, and I ask them to support Sarah Boyack’s amendment 100. As I said, we support all the amendments in the group.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 25 June 2024
Monica Lennon
This is a really important contribution from Mark Ruskell. For clarity, I take this opportunity to say that amendment 104 seeks to place a duty on the minister when creating secondary legislation under section 13. It is not about putting that duty on to local authorities directly. Throughout the scrutiny of the bill, we have heard that there is a real appetite for more activity on reuse, and our local authorities are certainly looking for more guidance and support on that. Mark Ruskell says that he feels a bit frustrated; I would say that that is putting it politely. I have to say, in the gentlest possible way, that the minister’s explanation seemed a little bit on the weak side. I take the point about the importance of co-production, in the spirit of the Verity house agreement, but the issue is not one of directly imposing a duty on to local authorities.
It is important to embed reuse into the bill as much as we can. Amendment 104 simply adds that we should
“make further provision for the promotion of reuse to assist local authorities to achieve their targets”.
I am seeking to be helpful here, and I think that there is cross-party support for the intention behind the amendment. I hope that the Government can give it full consideration.
I am grateful to Mark Ruskell for giving way.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 19 June 2024
Monica Lennon
The minister will know that almost 23,000 people have signed a petition that urges the Scottish Government to stop the downgrading of Lanarkshire’s neonatal intensive care unit. It is important that my constituents believe that their voices are being heard.
The Scottish Government says that parents are key partners in the care of their babies and that we should do everything possible to keep mothers and babies together. That said, how can the Scottish Government continue with the devastating downgrading plans, when ignoring the pleas to save the Wishaw neonatal intensive care unit would force families to be apart at a vulnerable and critical time?
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 19 June 2024
Monica Lennon
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will proceed with its reported plans to downgrade the neonatal intensive care unit at University hospital Wishaw. (S6O-03599)
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
I will bring us back to net zero, because that was starting to sound like an interesting discussion.
We know that land and land use have the biggest role in Scotland’s emission of greenhouse gases. Do the owners of large landholdings have a moral and societal responsibility to promote net zero and climate change measures? If we agree on that point, is it reasonable to accept that there should be obligations on the biggest emitters to reduce their emissions? If so, how could the bill be strengthened and improved in that area? I am looking at Mr Macleod in particular.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
I do not want to push you beyond your remit, but I will go back to Don Macleod’s point that the polluter should pay. If we are looking at responsibilities and obligations, would it be fair to say that there should be an evidence base on the impact of certain activities? Is it better to look at it as being about ensuring that there is clarity on any impact and what should be an appropriate form of compensation or mitigation?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
Thank you.
Issues of local context and the role of ministers in making decisions have come up. How might the process be improved to take account of local context? Is it appropriate that ministers make the decision, or is there another way in which that could be done more proportionately?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
Just one, convener—it is on small landholdings. From the written submissions, I think that the Faculty of Advocates and the Law Society of Scotland are broadly supportive of the small landholders provisions, but in Turcan Connell’s—
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
Okay. I will let you expand on that in a moment.
In contrast, the Turcan Connell submission raises concerns. You state that you disagree with those provisions and that
“The Bill introduces some rights for small landholders from croft tenure and others from 1991 act tenure which could result in”
unnecessary complexity. Can you expand on what rights you are referring to?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 18 June 2024
Monica Lennon
That is helpful—thank you.