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 1207 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
Yes.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
I am sorry—could you repeat that?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
Yes. I have figures in front of me. However, those tend to fluctuate, so I do not necessarily want to put an exact figure on it and say that that will be the case going forward.
There are currently five under-18s in young offenders institutes and, as of 2 May, there were seven places vacant. I know that those figures changed during the lead-up to the committee meeting, but they have generally been around that level.
10:45Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
As far as I am aware, that is not going ahead at the moment, but I have said that it can be looked at.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
The Scottish Government’s key priority and commitment is to keep children out of prison. The key word is “children”—we are classing 16 and 17-year-olds as children. The hearings system is not based on a specific offence or age; secure care already deals with some of the most serious offences and is already equipped to deal with children—at the moment, aged under 16—who have committed serious offences. I know that the committee has heard strong evidence from secure care that it is equipped and able to deal with 16 and 17-year-olds who have committed those serious offences.
I go back to what I said at the beginning, which is that, although I appreciate that concerns exist around that provision, the Lord Advocate still has the right to try a child in a criminal court, although it will end in a secure care setting instead of a YOI. As I said in my opening comments to Mr Kerr, it is about rehabilitation of the child and giving that child the best chance to not reoffend, and a secure care centre is definitely the most appropriate setting for that to be the case.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
I agree that there should be uprating. As I have said to the committee, I will go through the financial details in greater detail at the Finance and Public Administration Committee next week, so I encourage members to tune in to that for more information.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
MRCs are obviously designed to be less restrictive than secure care. Expanding the circumstances in which MRCs can be used will mean that more children can be supported in that way, although I appreciate that the member has concerns about that. The conditions will be imposed where that is deemed appropriate. The safeguards that already exist under the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 will still apply, so I do not feel that they need to be added to the bill. A children’s hearing is not a sentencing tribunal—it makes decisions to safeguard and promote the child’s welfare throughout their childhood and not necessarily to punish a child for their actions. Therefore, MRCs, like any measure that comes through the children’s hearings system, can be imposed only if doing that is better for the child than not doing it.
10:00Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
Yes. As I said, it will be deemed on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances surrounding that child.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
We have been clear that the number of cross-border placements needs to be reduced. I do not want to say that such placements should end entirely, because, as I have mentioned, they are required in exceptional circumstances.
You will be aware that the Scottish Government currently funds the last bed in secure care centres in order to keep capacity for children in Scotland. That helps with capacity and funding issues, but we will need to monitor that.
I am going to meet Claire Coutinho, a UK Government minister, to discuss cross-border placements. The arrangements for my meeting with her were finalised just this morning. Although that will be an introductory meeting, the issue of cross-border placements will come up, because, regardless of financial circumstances, we want to minimise the number of such placements, which should be provided only when they are deemed to be absolutely necessary for the safeguarding of the children.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 3 May 2023
Natalie Don-Innes
This is a finely balanced area. The issue of upholding the rights of the person who has committed the offence and, of course, those of the victim has had strong consideration. Crucially, at the end of the day, children’s hearings are not criminal justice settings and the rights of the victim in that setting must be balanced carefully against the rights of the child in question.
I know that evidence that the committee has received via written responses to its call for evidence has highlighted the range of views on this matter, including the challenges of the fine balancing act that I have spoken about. I consider that the bill strikes the right balance between the victim’s needs and the principles that inform and underpin the children’s hearings system.
I assure the member that we have listened carefully to the points made during the evidence sessions about information sharing, and we will continue to do so as the bill progresses through Parliament.