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 1677 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
Mr Campbell, you mentioned the interface with Government, and you both had terms of reference set for your work. In our evidence session last week, we heard from the Scottish Police Federation that, despite it making clear its concerns about the opportunity costs, which the convener outlined, the dialogue was very limited once things were set in train.
I appreciate the tension in the situation. However, if a cabinet secretary has triggered an inquiry, they must surely have an on-going interest in its implications, even if they cannot get involved or be seen to be involved, for very good reasons that I understand. What would you expect a cabinet secretary who has instructed that an inquiry be undertaken to do during it? Would you expect interest from them during the inquiry or only once it has been completed? As the chair of an inquiry, would you expect them to tell you what you have to do and then go away and only come back years later?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
Good morning to both Johns. Thank you for joining us. Continuing on similar themes, I suspect, I want to explore a little more the culture of the legal fraternity in such inquiries. Of course, one makes the assumption that all lawyers operate from complete integrity and ethics. That is one view: that they provide good works. The other view, potentially, is that inquiries are a racket whereby certain law firms and lawyers have found a very good way of making money. Particularly if they build up a reputation, they can roll from public inquiry to public inquiry. I know that that sounds contentious, but I want to explore your understanding of the tension between those two positions, because there is clearly at least a possibility that such a situation may occur.
What is your thinking on that? Critically, is the legal profession able to look at itself and say, “This isn’t a great look,” if there is even a sense that that might be the case?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
However, you recognise my point that that could occur—that, where there is no proper financial governance as we would understand it, it is in the interest of lawyers, or some lawyers, to prolong an inquiry because there is a direct correlation with more billable hours for them, to put it simply. Indeed, many law firms reward their lawyers according to the number of billable hours that they put through on a particular—
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
I have a final question on costs. John Campbell, the convener has already asked you about this. You said in your submission that you do not see that it is necessary to publish individuals’ costs, and I understand the sensitivity around that. However, if you were looking to effect change, although there might be some initial pain if somebody’s costs are put in the public domain, that would very swiftly change behaviours. I am interested in your thoughts.
In all of these cases, if I were coming in to consult, I would ask what you could do to immediately make a difference and to start to shift the culture. Publishing that information seems to be one thing that could be done. Tell me a really good reason why, if we are starting to get a proper focus on costs and not just allowing for massive cost overruns, we would not actively seek to put the cost of everybody involved in a public inquiry in the public domain, in exactly the same way as our salaries go into the public domain and we must declare everything.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
Do you want to comment on that, Mr Campbell?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
But it is public money—that is the difference.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
I am just asking you to speak for yourself.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
What is your direct experience, Mr Campbell?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
Thank you.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 June 2025
Michelle Thomson
That speaks to a cultural issue, does it not, John Sturrock?