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 5449 contributions
|
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Cross-Party Groups
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
It is not for me to object to any particular cross-party group, but I echo what the convener said and what, I think, we all feel, which is that there is a huge number of cross-party groups. The one on nature doubles down on what is being done by other groups. That does not mean that it should not be approved, but the committee will have an obligation at the end of the first full year to look at all the cross-party groups to see whether they are working properly and achieving their aims.
I am sorry, convener but I cannot see how MSPs—notably, those who, although I would not call them group hoppers, are members of several cross-party groups—are not snowed under. In fairness, I am a member of four groups, and I am snowed under. I just have that concern. I do not want to vote against the proposal. If those groups had come in the first tranche, they would probably have had an easier ride; it is unfortunate for them that they are in the last tranche. As I know you acknowledge, convener, the committee needs to do some work on how all the groups are working, because I fear for them.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Cross-Party Groups
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
Before I go any further, I ought to declare that I am joint convener of the cross-party groups on crofting and rural policy, neither of which is mentioned in Mark’s list of groups with which he feels there might be some overlap. I am just concerned about that overlap and how you would manage it. Many of the subjects that you mention are already covered by those groups. Will you explain whether you have reached out to them to find out about that? Have you looked at their work programmes to see whether the work of this cross-party group would fit neatly into the gaps or whether it might be doing the same work?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Cross-Party Groups
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
I will leave it there, except to say that I will be watching closely at the end of a year to see how you have managed to integrate. I am also taken by the fact that you said that, if you do not think that the group is working, you will not continue it. That is honest and helpful, and it makes it easier for me to give it a go. We will come to that at the next bit.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Decision on Taking Business in Private
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
On the item on consent in relation to United Kingdom Parliament bills, I want to clarify that that relates just to the letter and not to all future consents to bills that we might consider.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Cross-Party Groups
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
The topics list does not specifically include climate emergency, but it does include many topics that are covered by the other groups.
I have another question, which is on the organisations. Given that many of the subject areas that you will wish to discuss are covered by other user groups, why have you just gone for environmental groups in the organisations list and no user groups on the areas that you propose to discuss, such as aquaculture, agriculture, forestry and national parks?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Cross-Party Groups
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Edward Mountain
A lot of the questions that I wanted to ask have been eloquently put by the deputy convener.
Michael, I bet you wish that you had got the group up and running really early on, when we were not worried that there were more cross-party groups than back-bench MSPs. I think that we are into triple figures now, which causes us concern. I observe that a lot of your members are sitting on more than four cross-party groups, and I think that four is probably pushing it if they are to give each group their full attention.
I am taken by the subject area that you want to look at. Every local authority has a slightly different approach to that area. To be parochial, how will you rope the Highlands into something that will be happening down in Edinburgh? How will you include Orkney and Shetland, which might take a slightly different approach than is taken in the Western Isles? I am interested in how you will touch on that.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 29 June 2022
Edward Mountain
So, you have no preconception about the number of dogs that might be required in any circumstance. As you have rightly said, the aim is to get the fox out and shot as quickly as possible, without it being chased, and that will require the use of more than two dogs. Am I right in saying that you have no preconception about the number of dogs?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 29 June 2022
Edward Mountain
I will be interested to see how the licence pans out. Mr Dignon will know that, in previous licensing schemes, gamekeepers were required to keep poults in a freezer until they had been inspected by Scottish Natural Heritage, in order to prove that they had been damaged by the species in question.
Lord Bonomy made a very interesting point about the number of dogs required to cover an area of ground. He said that more than two dogs and half a dozen guns would be needed to cover a 200-acre block of forestry. In your view, what would be an acceptable number of dogs? You said that you have been thinking about licensing. If somebody applied for a licence to use 10 dogs, would that be sufficient or too many? How about 15? Where is the limit?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 29 June 2022
Edward Mountain
Thank you for allowing me to ask those questions, convener.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 29 June 2022
Edward Mountain
This is the second time that I have been to the committee, but I again remind members that I have an interest in a family farm. It does not have lambs on it, for which I might be thankful.
Minister, I have a couple of what I think are interesting comments to make about licensing. I think that Jim Fairlie is right: flushing a fox out of a wood can be preventative if it moves the fox on before lambing starts. Foxes will use the same ground each year and should be moved on before lambing starts. However, I am concerned about the requirement to provide evidence of damage. If evidence of damage has to be submitted during the short lambing period, everyone will want to use the same dogs for the same 14-day period to flush foxes out of the woods to waiting guns. How will that issue be addressed?
