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 3543 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
I take note of that. We may well come back to it.
Like you, I wore a school uniform—more than half a century ago now. I do not know whether it fell out of fashion, but my own experience was that there was an active facilitation of second-hand school uniforms at that time. In fact, there were even retail outlets that organised the sale and receipt of second-hand uniforms. You are absolutely right—very often, there is still a long shelf life left in a school uniform item, as it has only become available because the young person has grown out of it very quickly.
In the first instance, Mr Torrance recommends that we keep the petition open and that we write to the various agencies as he described. We will then hear what they have to say and consider the petition again on receipt of their submissions. Do members agree?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Thank you.
I thank Rhoda Grant for joining us and for her contribution. As she will have heard, we will keep PE1916 open for the time being and see what response we get. I understand that there are considerable issues, and she highlighted the considerable costs that have been associated with simply trying to make do in relation to the existing facility.
I thank everybody for their forbearance with the remote format and for their contributions, and I look forward to future meetings.
Having said that, I gather that David Torrance wishes to contribute further on the points that we have been discussing.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
That being the case, although we note the BMA’s submission, we are minded to keep the petition open and to write to the Scottish Ambulance Service and the Scottish Government in the terms suggested by Mr Sweeney and supported by Mr Stewart. Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
As no other member wishes to come in, on the basis of David Torrance’s suggestions and the contribution from Rhoda Grant, I think that we are proposing to write to the Scottish Government to highlight the success in Dundee and to ask when the pause is likely to be removed. We will also ask the Scottish Government whether it intends to provide dedicated funding to ensure that ultrasound scanning can be made available to more patients in Scotland and how it plans to raise awareness of essential tremor among patients and healthcare professionals.
I would also like us to take on board Rhoda Grant’s suggestion that we write to the two organisations that she mentioned. I am sorry, but I did not actually catch the acronyms, but they will have been noted by the clerks. She mentioned two bodies that she was keen for the committee to write to, so I would like to include them in our further submissions.
Are members content with that approach?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Do members agree with Mr Torrance’s recommendation that we close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
In closing the petition, I thank the petitioner, Carol Burns, and very much hope that she engages with the Scottish Sentencing Council on the development of the guidelines that is under way.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Is the committee content to proceed on the basis of Ruth Maguire’s recommendation?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
PE1888, which was lodged by Joseph Allan, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to grant full legal protection to hedgehogs and moles. We previously considered the petition at our meeting on 3 November 2021, when we agreed to write to the hogwatch Scotland project, the Scottish Wildlife Trust and the Mammal Society.
We have had responses from the hogwatch Scotland project, which is operated by the Conservation Volunteers in Scotland, and the Scottish Wildlife Trust. In its submission, the hogwatch Scotland project reiterates that
“Hedgehog numbers in Britain have fallen from an estimated 30 million in the 1960s to just 1.5 million in recent years”.
It notes with concern that
“the Scottish biodiversity list categorises hedgehogs in the ‘Watching Brief Only’ category. This means hedgehogs are considered of ‘less concern’ and only require monitoring”.
It considers that the declines that have already been shown by current estimates require a more proactive approach, and it believes that
“Increasing the level of protection afforded to hedgehogs in Scotland and raising awareness about their conservation could drive conservation efforts from the public, particularly in urban settings.”
In its submission, the Scottish Wildlife Trust explains that it is
“very concerned about the decline in hedgehog numbers, which is highlighted by the fact that it is currently considered vulnerable to extinction on the Red List for Scottish Mammals. We would like to see concerted action to protect these and other vulnerable species by directly addressing the causes of their decline”
and increasing legal protection. The trust’s view is that there does not seem to be evidence to suggest that moles have experienced a similar decline in numbers to that of hedgehogs. However, it believes that more needs to be done to mitigate the impact of human activity on all biodiversity. The trust believes that that is especially important if we are to achieve the Scottish Government’s ambition to address both the nature and climate crises.
We have been advised by the Scottish Government that it is awaiting the outcome of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee review, which is not due for publication until early spring. It will then require scrutiny before any policy actions can be taken, albeit that there is clearly widespread concern in relation to the issues that the petitioner has raised. I am minded to recommend that we close the petition and look forward to the consideration of the JNCC review. Are colleagues minded to support that course of action?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
PE1889, which was lodged by Nikki Peachey, encourages the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to provide a tailored financial solution for self-employed individuals in the travel industry whose businesses have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic—and, indeed, who have been on the Scottish Parliament campus, lobbying MSPs directly. When we last considered the petition in November 2021, we agreed to write to the Scottish Government and industry representatives.
A response has been received from ABTA—the Travel Association. It states in its submission that the summer of 2021 failed to deliver a meaningful restart for the travel sector. It recently conducted a survey on behalf of the save future travel coalition, and businesses reported that the value of new bookings that were taken across the summer and early autumn last year represented, on average, only 31 per cent of the value of new bookings that were taken over the same period in 2019, before the pandemic.
ABTA notes that self-employed travel agents operate a variety of business models and, as such, are able to access only part of the grants that have been made available. In relation to furlough, the submission explains that some staff have been required to issue refunds and manage booking requests on behalf of clients. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs data shows that uptake of furlough by travel agencies and tour operators to 30 April 2021 was only 49 per cent, compared with 70 per cent in hospitality.
ABTA believes that many of the grant funding schemes in Scotland have failed to recognise the impact of the unique restrictions that have been placed on travel. Many local authority-administered schemes focused on the physical constraints caused by Covid-19, such as the closure of premises or social distancing measures. The submission explains that schemes such as temporary closure grants were only applicable to retail travel agents when their premises were required to close and that online travel agents, tour operators and travel agent home workers were ineligible for that funding. Travel businesses without rateable premises were not eligible for the one-off travel agent fund payment that the Scottish Government launched in January 2021, or for the restart grant scheme.
Furthermore, ABTA advises that it is aware that many independent agents within its membership have had to remortgage or sell their homes in order to keep their businesses alive.
ABTA highlights support schemes that have been offered by the Northern Ireland Executive, such as the limited company director’s support scheme or LCDSS, which provided an initial one-off taxable grant of £3,500 to eligible company directors in January 2021, and the 2021 Northern Ireland travel agents coronavirus financial assistance scheme, which included a one-off single payment of £3,500 for self-employed travel agents who were working from home. That was clearly a different approach.
I invite Paul Sweeney to comment.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 January 2022
Jackson Carlaw
Thank you, Mr Sweeney. That was quite comprehensive.
As no other colleague wishes to comment, we will keep the petition open and write to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy on the basis that Mr Sweeney has suggested. In particular, we will draw to her attention the package of support measures that were implemented in Northern Ireland, which perhaps seemed to have responded more directly to the aims of the petitioner. Do colleagues agree with that course of action?
Members indicated agreement.