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 1495 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
You, and indeed Mr Stewart, made the point about the value of communities. To what extent will local communities perceive these programmes as being done to them rather than done through them?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
I want to bring in Audit Scotland here. Many years ago, I had another life doing project management and large-scale so-called transformational change programme management. Of course, the laugh was that the only time your plan was ever accurate was at the end of the programme or whatever. That comes with the job.
From Audit Scotland’s perspective, going back to the concept of scrutiny where there are diffuse accountabilities, it can become a bit of a circular firing squad. What role do you see for yourselves going forward in this complex multitude of city region deals? As we said, some started years ago, like Glasgow in 2014, while Falkirk, which is in my area, was signed last week.
The committee has chosen to do an inquiry into this but if we wait until the end of the deals, 25 years down the line, the only thing that we can be certain of is that we will have got lots of stuff wrong. Where do you see yourselves fitting in to avoid that circular firing squad? Where do you see a committee such as ours fitting in and, indeed, who else would fit in? We can be confident that a lot of this will be wrong because that is its nature.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
I am hearing from you that you agree that the arrangement is fundamentally quite untidy because we have, in effect, two accountable partners and a delivery partner in the form of the local authority. Neil McInroy, it looks as though you want to come in on that point.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
Are there any final comments? Paul Mitchell, I am sorry that I have not asked you anything directly. Are there any final comments on the themes that we have explored?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
Is it accountable or is it responsible for delivery? I ask that because, from a delivery perspective—perhaps this goes back to what Neil McInroy was saying earlier—the local authority will rely on the staging gates for sign-off, and they could be different from those for the Scottish Government and the UK Government, and it is responsible for delivery. I suppose that I am making the point that it is quite untidy to have two Governments and one local authority that is responsible for delivering. Having such a governance structure automatically builds in inefficiencies because of all the staging gates.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
I want to return to the subject of growth and the link with capital. I think that it was David Miles who reminded us that, on capital, we have a short-term bounce of about 2.5 per cent. There was a lot of sleight of hand in the budget in relation to the short-term nearside position but, in the longer term, capital investment will continue to be very low. How on earth will we be able in any way to mitigate—if we can mitigate it at all—the damage of Brexit over the longer term, given that, as we have discussed throughout this meeting, we have had only marginal nearside increases?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
I was about to say, “Always look on the bright side,” but the outlook does not seem to be terribly bright.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
I thank the witnesses for joining us—it has been a very worthwhile session. I want to finish off by getting your reflection on Brexit, which, incredibly, we have barely discussed. You comment that
“Weak growth in imports and exports over the medium term partly reflect the continuing impact of Brexit”.
You then refer to a decrease in trade intensity, which I think that I asked about this time last year.
My question is about the impact on potential productivity in the light of the budget being projected as a growth budget. I know that you commented on that in March earlier this year, but it would be useful to get your latest reflections on the specific impact of Brexit on productivity. Obviously, we have the nearside issues, but I am asking about the longer term—I think that you used a 15-year projection.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
You have just made the point that I was going to come on to. We face the geopolitics: we are out of the EU, we have the diminishing trade intensity and we have activity in the rest of the world. We have President Trump and there are geopolitics going on, so we could end up being in a very isolated place when it comes to replacing some of that trade, notwithstanding the point that you make about services.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 20 November 2024
Michelle Thomson
You have turned down the volume with your latter comments. However, I want to be absolutely clear: is it your contention that the information that the committee has been given by Petroineos regarding the hydrocracker and its operational safety is inaccurate, or do you not have sufficient information to be able to make that assertion? If it is the latter, are you able to provide the committee with all the pieces of evidence that you believe support your view? Can you clarify that point for the public record?