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 2085 contributions
|
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 22 February 2022
Monica Lennon
I was asking about the discussions that you have had with the STUC in the past month or so. Colleagues have hinted that it is important that we get this right. We have an opportunity to take a beat—to pause and to ensure that we get this right. The workplace parking levy will directly affect workers. You are trying to change the behaviour of workers, so I am concerned about the fact that you have not discussed the issue with the STUC.
I welcome other work that you are doing, for example making public transport safer, particularly for women.
What is your message today to women who do not feel safe using buses or trains, or who cannot get on a bus or a train? I live in Hamilton. People felt really safe using the X1 bus express service to Glasgow, but that service has gone. I spoke to your predecessor about that. The service has not been brought back by anyone—not First Bus, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, South Lanarkshire Council or the Scottish Government. People in my area might be able to swallow a workplace parking levy if there was a bus that they could get on.
We have all got examples, minister. What is your message to people who are worried, do not feel safe or do not have a bus to get on? They will have to take their car anyway, and possibly bear the cost of the measure because their employer might well pass that on. I believe that to be what has happened in eight out of 10 cases in Nottingham, which is the model that you are so keen on.
People are worried, minister. What is your response? They do not want to know about the difference between the legislation and the regulations. You are the brand new transport minister. What are you doing to listen to people’s genuinely held concerns?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 22 February 2022
Monica Lennon
You have been honest in saying that, in principle, you are opposed to a workplace parking levy. If the Parliament voted for the motion to annul the regulations, to create a bit of space for the scheme to be reconsidered and for improvements to be made, what would you like the minister to consider, who would you like her to speak to and what practical differences would you like to be made?
I know from our shared time in local government that you and I both want to empower not only local authorities but people throughout Scotland to make the best choices for themselves. Would you, for example, want the minister to consider the everyone aboard campaign, which calls for free public transport by bus to be extended to everyone under the age of 25 as well as to people on low incomes and benefits? Is that the kind of measure that the Parliament should consider so that there can be a place for a workplace parking levy in the future?
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Portfolio Question Time
Meeting date: 10 February 2022
Monica Lennon
I thank the cabinet secretary for that helpful update, and I, too, welcome Neil Gray to his post.
As the minister and the cabinet secretary know, it is estimated that around 60,000 mothers in Scotland had their babies taken from them due to historical forced adoption practices. For many years, the campaigners have been fighting for justice, including for a long-overdue formal apology, specialist mental health support and better access to records.
I am glad that the cabinet secretary is aware that real difficulties exist for mothers, fathers and adoptees in accessing information and records. Will he meet me, campaigners who want to bring additional information to his attention and other MSPs who have an interest? Will he commit to doing all that he can to urgently improve access to records and information?
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Portfolio Question Time
Meeting date: 9 February 2022
Monica Lennon
The chronic pain services in NHS Lanarkshire have effectively been closed down for anyone who needs pain relief injections. I again draw the Government’s attention to my constituent Liz Barrie, whose pain relief injection is overdue by three years. Liz, a former nurse and courageous advocate for chronic pain patients, fears that her mental health is being destroyed, and she is losing hope. Another constituent, disabled war veteran Matt Walton, has been waiting in agony for treatment since 2019. Will the minister work with me urgently to support Liz and Matt? Can she confirm that any patient who needs a vital pain relief injection will be offered a referral to another health board if their own board cannot cope with demand?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
Before I ask my question, I note that Mark Ruskell referred to a moratorium on new incinerators. My understanding is that ministers have not confirmed a moratorium but have asked planning authorities to notify them of any new applications and decisions for energy-from-waste developments. Perhaps we could get clarification on that later for the Official Report.
It is good that we are discussing the role of incineration and energy from waste in the waste hierarchy. From 2011 to 2020, the total quantity of waste that was incinerated in Scotland increased by more than 200 per cent, so it is clearly an issue that is worth exploring today.
If we do not see a permanent ban or moratorium on new energy-from-waste developments, what should we see in NPF4 in relation to their future role, bearing in mind possible climate and nature impacts? We have already heard from Iain Gulland that NPF4 is missing the point on the circular economy so there is a bigger picture. I am interested to hear views from the witnesses, starting with Iain, given that I have mentioned him.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
If you want to add something, please go ahead.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
I think that Rosie Simpson wants to respond.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
I am glad that you got your point on the record.
What is Scottish Environment LINK’s perspective on the climate and nature impacts of incinerators or large-scale energy-from-waste developments? What are its views on the point about clarity and how NPF4 aligns with other reviews?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
While we are chatting, I note that we do not yet have the circular economy bill in place. Does anyone have a view on the importance of that bill being introduced so that everyone involved in making planning decisions knows that the issues are important? Iain has popped up on my screen.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
National Planning Framework (NPF4)
Meeting date: 8 February 2022
Monica Lennon
I am glad that you mentioned policy 20 in NPF4. I am looking at the part that says:
“Development proposals which involve the recovery of energy from waste should only be supported where ... it is consistent with climate change mitigation targets and in line with circular economy principles; and ... should supply a decarbonisation strategy aligned with Scottish Government decarbonisation goals and be refused where the strategy is insufficient”.
I am a former town planner and I find that difficult to navigate. We have heard about the shortage of planners and issues around skills. You have mentioned part of policy 20 and I have read out another part. Are we creating mixed messages?
