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 1757 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Can I move the amendment?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Amendment 513.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I do not have much to add. Rent reviews are quite an important and, I imagine, quite a contentious part of the bill. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary is willing to work on many of the amendments that have been lodged, so I will not press or move mine.
I have some concerns about amendment 297 in relation to the difference between “similar” and “comparable”. I will support it today, but more information might need to be provided before stage 3.
I will not press amendment 545.
Amendment 545, by agreement, withdrawn.
Amendment 297 moved—[Mairi Gougeon]—and agreed to.
Amendment 298 moved—[Mairi Gougeon].
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Yes.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Yes.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I will be happy to move amendment 545, which would insert only three little words but which I think is quite important for the section. Section 23(2) substitutes a new subparagraph in paragraph 7 of schedule 1A to the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991—the wording has been simplified and condensed, and the former paragraphs 7(4)(b), 7(4)(c)(i) and 7(4)(c)(ii) have been merged. In so doing, it appears that a few words have been omitted from paragraph 7(4)(b), which has changed the meaning of the subparagraph and rendered it meaningless. I believe that it was intended to include surplus housing and other fixed equipment provided by the landlord at the time when rent review is being used for a non-agricultural purpose. However, the omission of the words “that is used” means that it includes only fixed equipment provided by the landlord for a non-agricultural purpose. It would be very unusual for fixed equipment to be provided at the outset for a non-agricultural purpose, but it is quite common for fixed equipment to be provided for an agricultural purpose but to be used subsequently for a non-agricultural purpose—such as surplus housing.
Without amendment 545, the rent review provisions would not envisage rent accounting for houses that are surplus to the agricultural purposes of the farm. That would be an inequitable position when a tenant has a house that they are getting benefit from, whether in monetary terms or in kind—for example, to provide low-rent housing for family members—but they are not accounting for that asset in rent to their landlord. It is essential for fairness and balance that those words be reinstated.
My amendments 299A and 299B, which seek to amend amendment 299, would also insert a few words. Amendment 299 correctly carries over some of the wording from the current section 13 of the 1991 act to ensure that the rent review provisions in the bill are workable in ways identified at stage 1 by various stakeholder groups. Again, when it has been carried over, the wording has been condensed, but the omission of certain words changes the meaning from what I believe was intended. It is correct that the court should disregard any increase in rental value that arises as a result of improvement work carried out at the tenant’s expense. However, as it is drafted, amendment 299 would result in an unfair outcome for the landlord, because the Land Court would have to disregard all the increase in rental value even when only part of the work was at the tenant’s expense.
Equally, it is accepted that the landlord would not benefit from any resulting increase in rent for grant-aided expense. The current section 13 of the 1991 act disregards that increase only in so far as the work was grant aided—which is fair—but, in the bill as it is drafted, all the value would have to be disregarded, even if only part of it benefited from grant aid. That is an inequitable outcome that I do not think could have been intended.
I move amendment 545.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Yes.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
You asked Tim Eagle whether he felt that common law was sufficient to deal with a situation in which people who were involved in game management had caused damage through their use of non-tracks and so on. From your experience, do you feel that those laws are sufficient, or do you think that the bill needs to address that?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I wish to vote against amendments 282 and 285.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I would like a bit of clarity on amendment 501. Am I right in thinking that it would mean that a near relative could make a complaint, even if the tenant themselves did not want to make a complaint?