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 747 contributions
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
We are talking not only about compliance but about generating a positive culture in an organisation. If that is not informed by advice and guidance and by robust evidence, that can open the door to miscommunication and misunderstanding. Do you believe that it is appropriate for activist organisations to offer guidance that leaves public sector bodies vulnerable to legal challenge?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
You say that you are a charity, but you are largely funded by the Scottish Government. What percentage of your funding comes from the Government? Is it 90 per cent? Is it 100 per cent?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
What about Age Scotland?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
Jill, is it your organisation’s view that the law should permit employers and service providers to exclude all trans women from women-only spaces? Will you give a simple yes or no answer, please?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
Okay. I will move to my second question, convener. In its submission to the committee, the LGB Alliance says that
“unclear definitions of sex, women, men, gay and straight, make it difficult for public authorities to actively meet their responsibilities under”
the PSED. Jill, do you agree with the LGB Alliance that a lack of clarity around the definitions of sex and women has resulted in poor compliance with the PSED?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
Do you accept that failures by public bodies to meet their existing legal obligations around single-sex spaces will carry a significant cost to the public purse?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
Okay—you cannot comment. This is my fourth question, and I have two more questions to ask after it. The First Minister has emphasised that it is currently possible to exclude a trans woman from a women-only space on a case-by-case basis. Do you believe that that is practicable in the public sector, and what about the risk of women self-excluding from spaces and services because they cannot be certain that they are male free?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
My next question is to Vic Valentine. Will you provide the committee, either now or in writing, with a full list of public sector organisations in Scotland that you have advised? Is that something that you are able to do?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
Okay—so it is your view of good practice.
The EHRC’s submission highlighted “poor compliance” by listed authorities in relation to the duties, and stated that the
“setting of equality outcomes”
is
“not always informed by robust evidence.”
Do you agree with that?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Tess White
I suppose that if you are looking at—