Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 692 contributions
|
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
Thank you for the intervention. If I understand you correctly, my response is that the consultation has been happening from the beginning. It has got the bill to this point, and it has taken us through the scrutiny period in the Scottish Parliament, so it is not as though consultation—
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I will respond once we have been through the amendments, convener.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
Apologies for omitting that—it slipped my mind—but I do not support that aspect of the proposals, either. There are already well-established review processes inherent in NatureScot’s operations, and NatureScot is best placed to take a view, not Scottish ministers. Referring back to my conversation with Rachael Hamilton, the expertise lies with NatureScot and not with me.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
Ariane Burgess’s melodic amendments 2, 4, 6, 8 and 14 remove the exception at section 6 from the bill with the effect that it would be unlawful to use a dog to search for or flush a wild mammal for the purpose of providing quarry for falconry, game shooting or deer stalking.
Section 6 covers quite a wide range of recreational activities that make a significant contribution to the rural economy. They all may use dogs at some time to search for or flush wild mammals for the purpose of shooting or, in the case of falconry, killing by a bird of prey, and it is therefore right that they come within the scope of the bill and be regulated as other uses of dogs in hunting in the countryside will be. That consistency is important to the bill. However, they are lawful activities and the purpose of the bill is to ensure that, when dogs are used, they are used in a way that protects wild mammals’ welfare. It is not to ban otherwise permitted and lawful activities.
Mercedes Villalba made a comment about the Government seeking to avoid a row. That is not the case at all. It is about us, as the Executive, and the Parliament, as the legislature, sticking within the remit of what is intended, has been consulted on and is expected from the bill. Therefore, I cannot support amendments 2, 4, 6, 8 and 14.
Amendments 132, 134, 136, 138 and 142, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, would insert a new section after section 6 that would allow for the use of any number of dogs for the purpose of rough shooting.
Rachael Hamilton is right that there has been a great deal of exchange on rough shooting. I spoke about it last week. I reiterate that the bill allows for the majority of permutations of rough shooting to continue. Some events might need to adapt, as we discussed last week, usually by making a minimal change to how they undertake their activities. Minimal change is justified when set against the risk of creating a new loophole that would enable people to take as many dogs as they like, say that they were rough shooting and, in turn, besmirch the legitimate activity of rough shooting.
Equally, as I explained last week, the consistency of the bill is a strength and we could not justify creating an exemption for regulation of rough shooting—not an unimportant activity but, in essence, a recreational one—when, for example, farmers will have to change their behaviour and comply when seeking to protect their livestock or undertaking other essential purposes, such as environmental management.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I take on board the point. We discussed the issue a great deal last week, and in other exchanges. The concern about rough shooting becoming a cover for unlawful activity in the bill is one important reason why it needs to be included and why we cannot create an exception for it. I have also spoken about the other reasons. We cannot consistently ask farmers, on the one hand, to comply with regulations when they are seeking to protect their livestock, with very serious economic implications, while on the other hand not asking those who are involved in a recreational activity to comply with the same regulations. That would be unjustified. There is a combination of reasons why we cannot allow such an exception to be made.
Rachael Hamilton spoke of the perceived risk of “vexatious” claims. As I said last week, I understand that, but I do not think that we can allow any perceived risk of such claims to facilitate something that would, in the case of an exemption for rough shooting, significantly undermine the bill. However, I said last week that I would be content to work with the shooting industry on post-legislative guidance in order to try to manage down the risk of vexatious claims. I continue to consider how best to formulate the bill and whether improvements can be made to clarify our position, which I have explained. However, for the reasons that I have stated, I cannot support these amendments.
Amendments 133, 135, 137, 139 and 143 would create a new section and exception for field trials. Much of the reasoning here is the same as for the amendments on rough shooting. Again, we have discussed at length how rough shooting and field trials where mammals are pursued are included within, but can continue under, the bill. It does not actually matter how many dogs are present at the event as a whole or whether a dog is simultaneously carrying out a separate searching and flushing or retrieving activity. Provided that no more than two dogs ever join to find and flush quarry together, there is no reason to think that field trials are not compatible with the bill as it is currently drafted or that they could not continue.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
Yes, I am happy to.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I have.
I move amendment 148.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I am more than happy to keep talking to you about that, but my view today, and the reason why I will not support the proposal as formulated, is that review procedures are already very much built into the processes. That is within NatureScot, but I expect it could ultimately come under judicial review—I look to my legal colleagues on that. Review processes are available right up to judicial review, and I do not think that bringing those issues in house within the Scottish Government would be helpful.
I hope that that clarifies the point.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I have just explained that that is not the case. The individuals who were responsible for the breach of conditions on the ground would be responsible.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 7 December 2022
Màiri McAllan
I cannot commit today to its being a public register. I have to consider what can be published within the scope of the GDPR.
