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 2114 contributions
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
The sub-aims are really more to show, and to put beyond doubt, that the actions that are being taken contribute to the aims. They are not meant to be hierarchical; it is not about putting one above the other, but about highlighting those actions.
If more clarity needs to be sought—particularly as your expertise in this area definitely extends beyond mine—we are keen to get that evidence from the stakeholders who have responded to the committee as well as from members, but we have introduced those provisions in a way that we feel strikes that balance.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
I would have to consider what that would mean. However, housing is fundamental to the general aims, even outwith the proposed subsection. It is a given that, if we want thriving communities and we want to achieve the fourth aim of national parks, which is
“to promote sustainable economic, social and cultural development”,
we ultimately need people to live and work in our park areas. A fundamental element of that is the delivery of housing and ensuring that we have adequate housing for people in the area.
We could never have a definitive list of every single action. This is always the problem with lists: once something is there, it could become a case of making additions, or, if something is not on the list, people might feel that it is missing altogether. I am keen to get views on that. Housing is a key issue, but it would be captured by what we have set out.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
Absolutely. I outlined the importance of housing in helping to deliver the fourth aim in the subsection. As Rhoda Grant highlighted, there is also reference to
“promoting sustainable development activity which improves the health, wellbeing and prosperity of individuals and communities”.
Housing is intrinsic in helping to deliver on those aims.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
I would say that that is covered by the final provision of the proposed new section 1(2), which talks of
“promoting sustainable development activity which improves the health, wellbeing and prosperity of individuals and communities”.
People who live and work in our national park areas are absolutely a key priority. We want them to be thriving in prosperous areas. I am more than happy to engage in discussions with members around the table about any potential amendments that they would like to see and to get advice on any implications. I am happy to have those conversations.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
You are absolutely right about the boundaries. NatureScot had said that, should ministers decide to designate, it would have recommended the smaller core area, as it outlined in its report.
The situation was difficult according to the different reports that came out. NatureScot also outlined in its report that, if somebody felt that they were against a national park, it was harder to engage with them about the different options of what boundaries could look like and what shape governance could take. The boundary choices were informed by engagement with local people and other stakeholders. There were always going to be difficulties with that.
Can you remind me of your second point?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
Ultimately, we have tried to modernise the aims, and some of the language has been simplified. I do not think that the amendments to the statutory purposes will fundamentally alter the work that our national parks do and what they deliver; rather, they will ensure that the aims better reflect the work that our national parks do. Importantly, the proposed new section 1(2) of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, which modifies the aims highlights the actions that are key to delivering those aims, and it also better reflects some of the key challenges that we face at the moment with regard to the biodiversity and climate crises and sets out the role of our national parks in tackling them. The key aim is to introduce that language in order to better reflect the work that our national parks are doing.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
That change has been proposed because the parks’ aims are about not just the use of our natural resources but how they are managed in the interests of climate, nature and people. That phrasing better reflects the work that is done as part of the aims.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
There is quite a lot to pick up on, convener, so I hope that you will allow me to address all of your points.
On your last point, about NatureScot’s role as a reporter, it is important to note that that is what is set out in the 2000 act. I received two sets of advice from NatureScot that are very separate and distinct. The advice from NatureScot in its role as a reporter was based on the wide range of consultation that it had undertaken and the views that it had heard, and its report was produced on the back of that. Separately, we received advice from NatureScot in its other role, in relation to the other elements of the proposal, which advice was distinct. As I said, NatureScot’s role as reporter is set out in the legislation.
Another important report that was published at the time of my parliamentary statement the other week was the report from the Scottish Community Development Centre, in which it commented specifically on the role of NatureScot as a reporter. It is important to outline that the SCDC was appointed to independently assess the work and engagement that NatureScot had undertaken. The SCDC felt that NatureScot had
“managed to navigate the process with a commendable level of neutrality”.
The SCDC picked up in the report that there had been criticism of NatureScot, but it found that that would be expected in any
“high-profile public consultation”.
It also noted that
“few other organisations would have had the capacity and expertise to manage such a complex and large-scale”
exercise. It went on to say that NatureScot was the
“perfectly acceptable choice”
of reporter for the Scottish Government to make, given that it is the agency that operates on environmental issues. It is important to outline that in this context.
I will pick up on some of the other points—
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
I am not going to rule anything out. It is important that we consider the outcomes of the consultation, the whole process and how we can improve going forward. We must learn lessons from that—there is no question about it. I am following what is set out in the legislation. You would expect me, as a Government minister, to do that.
I appreciate the concern, which was raised with me early in the process, including directly by you, convener. It is important to outline the process that NatureScot undertook and to recognise that it was a significant undertaking. That is where the independent assessment and the views on NatureScot’s process are important.
Other organisations were brought in in relation to the engagement exercise. It is important to highlight the work that led to those findings of neutrality.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Mairi Gougeon
It is a matter of having the flexibility to design the process. As much as how to go about doing nominations was not set out in the 2000 act, the process that was established and the flexibility for us to design the process has represented an important exercise. There were various stages of consultation throughout 2022 and 2023, to consider what the criteria might be and how we would appraise different groups, and looking for nominations from those groups. Being able to design that process—trying to ensure that a bottom-up approach was taken to something that communities actually wanted—has been a positive.
It is also important to point out that local support was a critical element, as assessed through the appraisal process by the expert panel, in determining how to move forward to the next stage and what groups we should proceed with.