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
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Earlier, cabinet secretary, you said that a DRS for cans and plastic but not glass is better than no DRS at all. What has changed between now and June 2023, when you could have proceeded with a DRS with just cans and plastic? You might then have saved a lot of money on Circularity Scotland and also the court case that I think that Biffa is now taking against the Scottish Government.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
You could have had that in June 2023.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
We have heard that the deposit level—we do not know what it will be yet—could be different for different sizes of containers. Is that right, cabinet secretary?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I admit that, at the start of today, I was not planning on contributing to this debate, but, as the morning has gone on, it seems that more and more unknowns about the scheme have been discussed, and they probably need to be addressed.
We have heard that there has been no consultation on the changes to the previous Scottish scheme that had been proposed, even though the changes are quite considerable.
I am glad that officials managed to step in and clarify some of the points about closed-loop premises, but there are still some questions about that. I asked about Murrayfield because I am not sure whether it will be allowed to be classed as a closed-loop premises, as it has wanted to be in the past. I still think that there are question marks about that.
We do not know what the deposit level will be. At one point, 20p was mentioned, but the level is still to be set. There could be different prices for different sizes of containers. We also do not know what the handling fees or charges will be.
Just now, there are too many unknowns. I would like to see a lot more information before the regulations are approved.
As I said, what has changed since June 2023? At that point, the Scottish Government did not feel that it was appropriate to have a scheme without glass, but it does now. I am being accused of having a brass neck for asking that question, but, as committee members, we should be asking such questions, because we need to know, fundamentally, whether the scheme will work. Two years ago, the Scottish Government thought that such a scheme would not work, but it now thinks that it can work.
There are too many unanswered questions so, for that reason, I am not in a position to vote for the regulations today.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I will be brief, but I want to respond to the cabinet secretary’s comment that I am not in favour of the scheme. That is not my position. My position is that, given that there is so much information that we do not have just now, it is too difficult to say whether I am in favour of the scheme. I will leave it there.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
If you go to a cafe and buy a round of drinks, you will not be able to get the money back from that hospitality place any more.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Okay. We will stay with local communities. When the committee was looking to take evidence on the bill, we wrote to some community groups. Several of the responses to our call for views argued that recent consultations on electricity-related developments were simply box-ticking exercises and that the views of many respondents are routinely ignored.
The submission by Scotland Against Spin said:
“No opposition to the proposed changes will be forthcoming from Holyrood, whatever the responses to this latest consultation. In those circumstances, we are not going to waste our time making the same arguments that have already been ignored once and which will no doubt be ignored again.”
What is your response to that? Is it not a sign that we are not taking people with us?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Cabinet secretary, if it is such a great thing for communities, how come all the community groups that we wrote to about it are saying, “We will not take part because we are not being listened to”? It is not developers that are not listening to them; it is the Scottish Government. That is why they have real concerns. You may want to go down a path of earlier engagement and everything else, but this is what the community groups are telling us. Why are you not addressing that point? Why do they feel ignored at every opportunity by the Scottish Government?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
When projects are off the grid, does that mean that there are no contracts for difference or anything?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I want to pick up on something that we asked about last week. You have said that most of our ammonia is now imported, but we heard last week that the price of e-ammonia would be a lot more expensive than importing ammonia, so how would we force somebody to pay a higher price for e-ammonia instead? I know that we should be getting the price down, but that will not happen initially.