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 2160 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
I do not think that we will be doing that in secondary legislation. The term “public interest” is widely used in legislation and, particularly in the context of the bill that we are looking at, the public interest might be one thing in a Highlands setting and completely different in a lowland setting. We will not be defining public interest in secondary legislation. We do not think that that is needed, and it could have unintended consequences, because you could define public interest and it could then turn out that you need a different definition for something else.
I suggest that, at this stage, we are looking at a general understanding of what the public interest is, and we should trust NatureScot, when it is having those conversations with people who are relevant to the public-interest test, to find common ground.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
Public interest encompasses collective needs, values and interests of society as a whole rather than those of individuals or specific groups. The expression is to be understood and applied contextually. What constitutes public interest in different situations may be different. It may also evolve over time. For example, at the moment, a significant interest for the public at large is the concern about biodiversity loss and climate change. However, other public policy considerations might be relevant to any given decision, which requires NatureScot to take a very holistic approach to its decision making in relation to deer.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
I do not understand. We have already said that it will be set out in the code of practice.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
The public interest will be proportionate to the area, as I said in my previous answer. It would be entirely different in west Perthshire from what it would be in lowland Scotland or urban Glasgow. It is not about the proportionality of the approach from Government or the legislation; it is about how NatureScot then defines that with the people who it is bringing those plans into place with. Does that make sense?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
When you say the deer groups, are you talking about the deer management groups?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
Do you mean that the deer management groups think that their concerns about how they make a living would be overlooked in favour of a restoration order? I apologise if I am being dim here. I am just not quite getting your point.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
That makes sense to me now, so thank you for the clarification.
That is the whole point of the public interest test—when we talk about the public, we include those deer managers. They are part of the community in which they are living. Therefore, cognisance would have to be taken of all of that during any public interest test. Whether it is low or high ground, all those considerations will have to come into play.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
I do not think that there will be any conflict of interest. The rationale for having a NatureScot person on a panel is that, if NatureScot has a level of expertise in a particular area, it can then be part of that panel. I am not sure why there is a concern around that, and I am happy to hear the committee’s views on that. The panels are there to do what the panels are there to do, and if NatureScot can add to a panel’s ability to do its job, I am not sure why there would be a fear of a conflict of interest.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
NatureScot is a public body. It therefore has a duty, and it must act reasonably and with impartiality when carrying out all its duties. Furthermore, deer panels have to be approved by the Scottish ministers. If the panels must be approved by a Scottish minister, if NatureScot has to comply with the duties upon it, and on the basis that everything that we are trying to do under the proposed legislation is to make things better—as everybody agrees we want to do—I am not convinced that there is a concern. I was going to say “legitimate concern”, but it will be legitimate to people at the time. I hope that we are giving some comfort on the basis that the proposal is not meant to create an issue; it allows us to get the best advice possible on deer control at every opportunity.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Jim Fairlie
The venison dealer licence was not about food safety; it was to prevent poaching. If venison is being sold, it will be sold with the same rigour as any other game. Building confidence is more about us marketing the product. There was some confusion about Food Standards Scotland’s position, but it is quite comfortable about us moving the venison dealer licence because there will still be the rigour that there would be for any food product that goes into the human food chain.
There is a far bigger issue about how we market that product as something that we want people to eat. Removing an extra 50,000 head of deer a year is one thing, but we should see that as an opportunity rather than as a problem and we should be saying that venison is another iconic Scottish food that we can celebrate. I will do everything that I can to ensure that we get to that position.