Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Criathragan Hide all filters
Displaying 1113 contributions
|
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 6 November 2025
Elena Whitham
Do you think that the definition of sustainable development as set out in the bill could stand alone in the absence of a definition of wellbeing in the bill?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 6 November 2025
Elena Whitham
Does anybody else have any comments on that point?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 6 November 2025
Elena Whitham
The Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland’s view is that it does not support a statutory definition of wellbeing as set out in the bill. You explained clearly, Emma, that you believe that we will deliver on wellbeing if we incorporate all the human rights and have a human rights-based approach. Could you expand on that point for us?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 6 November 2025
Elena Whitham
From a UKELA perspective, what are the concerns around the definition of sustainable development?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 6 November 2025
Elena Whitham
That is helpful, because planetary boundaries, the link to environmental limits and the need to include them in the definitions also came up in last week’s evidence session.
Sustainable development is raised in relation to many different aspects of legislation and outcomes that we are seeking to achieve, but no real definition is agreed. How can we ensure that we collectively understand what sustainable development means? Would the bill be a vehicle to firm up a definition?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 4 November 2025
Elena Whitham
From the outset, my position is that I support Liam McArthur’s amendment 24, because it will allow us to put in place some more safeguards around the definition of terminal illness. In countries where such a definition is applied, we see, as Patrick Harvie just set out, that those who seek an assisted death do so at the later stages of a terminal illness.
I turn to amendment 143, which Mr Balfour has said is more of a probing amendment. If we use three months as the timeline, such a short prognosis will put people who are terminally ill in the difficult position of making a hurried decision, instead of being able to take time to consider all their circumstances.
On Daniel Johnson’s amendment on a six-month prognosis, I would defer to the committee’s stage 1 report, which set out our understanding of why a prognostic timeframe can be particularly difficult. I understand members’ desire to explore the issue but, at this stage, I would not be supportive of that. That is not to say that I will not change my position as we go forward, but clinicians who make decisions that affect access to benefits sometimes feel under undue pressure to make an assessment of a prognostic timeframe. That can also lead to a situation in which, although there is no clear prognosis, people are given a time limit that might not be realistic. We are starting to funnel people down a path.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 4 November 2025
Elena Whitham
We have heard from Liam McArthur about the differences. I agree that people who are terminally ill will, by definition, probably be considered to be disabled, too. However, Liam McArthur’s amendment 24, which excludes people who have only a disability or a mental health condition, would put in further safeguards.
At stage 1, clinicians and practitioners from Australia warned us about the limitations and difficulties of the six-month prognostic timeframe, which, as set out by Liam McArthur, specifically excluded some people who had neurological conditions.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 4 November 2025
Elena Whitham
I wonder what your thoughts are on section 7, which places a duty on registered medical practitioners, during the first declaration, to discuss palliative care and any other care that might be available to that individual. That would allow the individual to make an informed decision about any palliative care plans or future care planning that could be made. That is a safeguard; that will be discussed at that point. However, if you were to tie that to eligibility criteria, that person would not have the autonomy to say, for example, that they did not want those plans to be made. Indeed, when timeframes are really short, that might preclude somebody from accessing the supports that are available under the bill.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 30 October 2025
Elena Whitham
That is helpful. Perhaps Adam Milne would like to comment from a Carnegie perspective.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 30 October 2025
Elena Whitham
I want to spend a little time looking at the definitions. We have touched on that aspect quite a few times this morning, but it would be helpful if we had an understanding of where each witness sits on them. I will start with the definition of “sustainable development”. Section 2 of the bill gives a definition that was inspired by the 1987 report “Our Common Future”. It states:
“‘Sustainable development’ is development that improves wellbeing in the present without compromising the wellbeing of future generations.”
Kristers Lukins touched on the Scottish Youth Parliament’s work to look at what sustainable development means to young people, and I will give him an opportunity to come back in. First, however, I want to hear from the other witnesses about what they feel about the definition of “sustainable development” as set out in the bill. Perhaps Frances Guy can start.
