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 1489 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 9 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
Good morning. I will ask Professor Flinders a couple of questions from an academic perspective.
09:45Your submission makes comments about culture, behaviour, avoiding groupthink, confirmation bias, and so on. You also point out that there is a need for critical friends. How is that limited when power—for instance, over someone’s job, career or their future line of funding, in instances where third sector organisations rely on Government—comes into play? What are your general thoughts about how prevalent that is and how commonly it is understood as a risk in the public sector?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 9 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
That is helpful. The middle-road approach to continuous improvement that academia brings is worth the committee exploring further when we look at comparables in Scotland. I know that Sophie Howe wants to come in on my earlier point, then I will head back to Professor Flinders.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 9 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
We cannot see you, but we can hear you clearly.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
Okay. I get what you are saying about the scale of representation, and you make that point clear in your submission.
Have there been times when, in terms of line of sight of funding, you have felt that you or any of the organisations that you represent have been required to give what you might see as the right answer or the preferred answer because of the mechanism of funding and fears or uncertainty over that? Is that a general concern or a fear that you hold?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
Do you think that, in general, the Scottish Government wants a critical friend or is that a statement that it uses but that is a kind of esoteric desire? There is a difference between the two.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
That was serendipity, Lucy, because I intended to bring you in on the thread of trust, power and decision making, as I have specific questions about your very fulsome submission, which I appreciate was submitted on behalf of Scottish Women’s Aid, Close the Gap and Engender.
However, just to finish the point about how there could be a subliminal effect on bringing thoughts or decision making to the table, I want to ask about something contentious. When Parliament had its big debate about the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, I was surprised to find that no qualitative impact assessment had been done, over a period of six years, on the impact on women who had been raped or sexually assaulted by those with fully intact male genitalia in what they would consider to be safe spaces. I make no comment on the rights or wrongs of that—or on any of that debate—and instead I am exploring it from a decision-making point of view, because it is surprising that no qualitative impact assessment was done in six years.
My question to you and all the other witnesses is whether you have sought qualitative assessments in decision making. You mentioned equality impact assessments. Did you seek those and were you discouraged, or did you not seek them? How did that come about during a period of six years? I appreciate that you might not have been at Engender for six years, but I am interested in that, because it framed a decision-making process.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
I am interested in the nature of power and how it operates, and I used the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill as an example of how we got to a position in which, within six years, it never occurred to anybody to do such an assessment. I am not saying that it is the case that it never occurred to anybody to do that, but it looks like it, which seems quite incredible, so I find it hard to believe. I am sure that people asked that question and said, “Maybe we should look at this.” I am trying to understand whether there was a power dynamic at play. In my opinion the three organisations do excellent work in giving voice to women. Was there a power dynamic at play in which you asked that question and were dissuaded, or did you just not ask that question about looking at that area? That speaks to the issue of trust.
09:45Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
That is fine. I had one more general question, which is about wellbeing and economics, but I am happy to hear from Judith Turbyne or Craig McLaren on this theme.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
That is QED on my opening question.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 May 2023
Michelle Thomson
Good morning, everybody, and thank you for the very fulsome submissions that you made to this inquiry, which have been noted.
Rachel Le Noan, I want to come to you first. You make an interesting comment in the SCVO submission that it is about trust and power and who has it. You also quote the very interesting statement that trust and parity of esteem should be in “spheres ... not tiers” because,
“When you have tiers, you then have the whole issue around power and who has power and influence.”
Can you think of an example of where that has had practical effect and talk us through it?