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 1466 contributions
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
I am sorry—I thought that we were just making contributions for or against the motion.
As I said in my remarks, I hear the minister’s concerns and have heard what she said about the impacts, but there is actually no detail on any of that. We know that, for the last year for which we have figures, civil court running costs were £40 million, and the minister has mentioned a £4 million value for the fees. We have no information of what the SCTS will do differently if the motions are not passed and these increases do not go through. Despite having asked the minister in a letter previously, we do not know what the exact impact will be. We have heard general words about the fact that there will be an impact, but there has been no quantification of that at all either in this morning’s meeting or in writing previously.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
I am not sure that we could see your hand on the screen, Karen.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
We move on to questions from Elena Whitham.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
Elena Whitham wants to come back in.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
It is those pictures that tell stories that we can use not only to understand how we are doing but to increase citizens’ awareness of what they should expect from us, public bodies and others.
As there are no further questions from colleagues, that brings us to the end of this evidence session. I thank the cabinet secretary and her officials for joining us this morning and for the evidence that they have provided.
We will now suspend the meeting briefly before we move on to our next item. I hope that Karen Adam will be able to join us remotely.
11:21 Meeting suspended.Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
You talk about pay and inflation being the assumed pressures, given the figure that you have from the SCTS. I appreciate that it is the SCTS’s figure and its methodology. In the Scottish court fees 2024-25 consultation document, there is an analysis of inflationary pressures, and other than one year when the fee increase was more than 10 per cent, all the increases are under 10 per cent. What is the rationale for the 20 per cent increase for some court fees?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
I will not repeat what I said, but I flag to colleagues that the main reason given for the changes is inflationary pressures. We have heard, in response to questions earlier, that the Government is looking for an average increase of about 13 per cent in court fees. However, let us not forget that, as the minister outlined, there have already been increases—3 per cent in 2022, 3 per cent in 2023 and 2 per cent this year in April—so it is not as if it is starting from 0 per cent. We need to take that into consideration.
On that basis, the increases are out of line with what is appropriate—never mind my earlier point that I do not believe that full-cost recovery in the justice system is an appropriate approach. Justice should be universally available and not just for those with the ability to pay. I press my motion.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
For the next votes, put your hand closer to your face.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. I will open up with a comment and then a question. In your opening statement, you referenced the human rights sector’s anger and frustration, and you said that you want to continue to work with the sector as work on the bill progresses, with its potential introduction in session 7. Given that the engagement and work with stakeholders have gone on for a long time—nearly 10 years—one of their frustrations is about how they were informed that the bill would not be introduced in this parliamentary session. Why did you choose to tell some stakeholders about the bill’s delay via correspondence, very close to the programme for government’s publication? Most stakeholders heard about the delay only because the bill was not included in the programme for government, so how can you rebuild trust with them?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 October 2024
Maggie Chapman
Before I bring in Paul O’Kane, I want to follow up on Elena Whitham’s second question, about the specific issues that people were expecting to be able to talk about and deal with, although that is perhaps putting it too simplistically. When Parliament considered the bill that became the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022 earlier in the session, there was some discussion about the right to food. We were told to hold off on that aspect, however, as it would be addressed in a human rights bill.
Similarly, in going through and coming out of Covid, we have heard a lot about how disabled people have not had their rights upheld in so many different areas of life, and a lot was being pinned on the proposed human rights bill.
What can we say to stakeholders and to citizens who were pinning a lot of hope on that bill, given 18 months of what they might see as inaction?