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 1311 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
On part 1 of the bill, Police Scotland has stated that it is
“not of the opinion that the significant investment of budget and resources needed to meet its requirements are proportionate to the potential benefit.”
In addition, the memorandum from the Scottish Government states that
“the Bill does not seem to reach the right balance in what its outcomes would be paired with the costs to public bodies and charities”.
What are your views on those statements?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
Thank you. Convener, I have a question on the financial memorandum. Do you want me to come in with that at the end of the meeting?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
Finally, when you attended the Criminal Justice Committee on 25 June to give evidence on the bill, you stated that your bill would cost, at most, £23 million but would result in savings of
“£7 billion over a three-year average period of abuse.”—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 25 June 2025; c 4.]
Given the views that you have heard from stakeholders and the response that we have had from the Finance and Public Administration Committee on the cost of the bill—specifically, the cost of setting up and maintaining the register—have your predicted costs changed in any way?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
Good morning. Could you set out specifically how the provisions in part 1 of the bill will interact with the existing multi-agency arrangements for domestic abuse in Scotland—for example, the multi-agency risk assessment conference, or MARAC, multi-agency tasking and co-ordination, or MATAC, and the multi-agency public protection arrangements, or MAPPA? Could you set out why the current system, in which some domestic abuse offenders can already be managed under MAPPA, is not sufficient?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
The committee has more questions on the data gap, but I believe that my colleague Pauline McNeill will ask those.
We also heard concerns—the convener mentioned this in her questioning—that introducing a statutory register has the potential to divert funding from existing multi-agency work or front-line services. Could you respond to that concern? Would it be possible to balance new funding for the proposed register and the maintaining of funds for the non-legislative multi-agency work?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Sharon Dowey
Yes, thank you.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
What if we bring in the measure only for the most serious offenders? It sounds as though we are already monitoring the most serious domestic abuse offenders under MAPPA anyway. What would be the problem with introducing that through the bill? Last week, Dr Forbes referred to offending levels by the top 2 to 3 per cent of perpetrators. If we were to bring in the measure, what would be the problem with using the current system?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
We also received evidence from COPFS, which raised the concern that it is currently unclear what proportion of domestic abuse offenders are subject to MAPPA notification requirements. We know that some domestic abuse offenders are subject to MAPPA, but it is unclear how many. Are there issues with data collection and monitoring? If there was work to improve data collection for the current systems would there be less concern around the notification scheme under the bill, because we would have a better idea of how many people are under MAPPA?
Are you able to you tell us how many domestic abuse offenders are currently being monitored by MAPPA?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
Is that something that you could work with the member on? We have said that it is complicated—I understand that. My colleague Pauline McNeill will ask more questions about risk. If we tighten up the measure, and given that we are already monitoring some domestic abuse offenders under MAPPA, why could we not use the current system for that purpose?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
I know that questions are coming on risk, so I will leave it at that just now.