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 1848 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
We have heard that having a threshold of 1,000 hectares would not bring in huge amounts of farmland—I think that the cabinet secretary said that it would be 1.3 per cent. If the threshold was reduced to 500 hectares, for what percentage of farmland would land management plans be required?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I will not repeat myself, convener.
On my amendments—especially in relation to amendment 343—it is good to hear that Ariane Burgess and Mercedes Villalba recognise that some landowners own land that is scattered across all of Scotland. Some of those landowners are electricity infrastructure companies, so I am sure that those members will have no problem in supporting amendment 343. All that I am proposing is that landowners who have land scattered across Scotland that
“is used for the purposes of electricity infrastructure”
must produce a land management plan that would go through the same community process as everyone else.
I will speak to another couple of amendments. I completely agree with the deputy convener’s points about urban Scotland. We all have areas in our constituencies and regions where there are absentee landlords and derelict sites, whether that is in city centres or on brownfield sites. It would be good to explore that issue further and consider whether an amendment can be lodged at stage 3 to address some of those concerns.
I want to speak about the threshold for obligations potentially being reduced from 1,000 to 500 hectares. We heard that that would widen the scope, with applicable land that is used for farming increasing from 1.3 per cent to 3.6 per cent—I think that that is the figure that Mercedes Villalba mentioned. However, that does not give the full story. How many farms would that cover? How many farms would then have to produce land management plans? We do not have the figure and we do not know what impact that change would have.
Farmland is changing, too. I imagine that some farms might be getting bigger as Labour’s cruel family farm tax kicks in and we see farmland being bought and sold. That might have a big impact on farmers, so the last thing that they need on top of that cruel farm tax is to have more red tape, bureaucracy and cost built in.
I will leave it there.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Does Bob Doris anticipate any costs arising from his amendments requiring another location for all land management plans to be held?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I hear what Monica Lennon is saying. If there is misinformation, we should do everything that we can to stamp it out and decisions should be based on evidence.
However, when it comes to some community groups being loud, a lot of them are loud because they are angry at what they see on their doorsteps and they do not feel that they are being listened to. We need to do more about that. If we can bring communities with us on our journey to net zero, that will be a win for us all. I do not feel that that is happening now, and that is why I lodged amendments in that regard.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Will the member take an intervention?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
At the committee stage, we heard evidence about the ownership of landholdings—for example, a unit trust—being split into small packets, even though they are managed as one. Will those amendments cover that?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the public interest and the community interest are not always the same thing? There is often a conflict between community interests and what might be considered to be the public interest. For example, with a wind farm, there might be conflict between the two. How do we address that?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Will the member take an intervention?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I agree with a lot of what the deputy convener has said about urban Scotland, where much more needs to be done to get derelict sites out of being derelict and back into use. As we took evidence during the past few months, we never took evidence on urban Scotland and some of these issues, because they were not really part of the scope of the bill. Would it be right for us to open that up now, when we have not taken any evidence? In hindsight—we all have 20:20 hindsight—was it a mistake that those issues in urban Scotland were not part of the bill that was introduced?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 3 June 2025
Douglas Lumsden
For example, we heard from Gresham House, where sites were managed as one but there were multiple owners within that one site. Will what you are bringing forward address that situation?