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 740 contributions
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
Dr Lamont, I have a specific question about your paper. First, however, do have you any thoughts on that broader question?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
You co-wrote a paper with Pamela Cox and Maurice Sunkin on the case for the Victims Commissioner for England and Wales. That is relevant because, right now, this Parliament is discussing a proposed victims and witnesses commissioner for Scotland. I think that the convener sits on the committee that is considering that bill, although I do not.
I read the paper with interest, and what really struck me was your conclusion. Forgive me for paraphrasing, and correct me if I have this wrong but, in effect, you put the question: if the new commissioner is not to be given statutory powers, is it really worth having him or her? For the benefit of the committee, will you elaborate a little on your thinking in reaching that conclusion?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
Good morning, panel. Alison Payne has reminded me that Reform Scotland published an excellent paper last year on parliamentary reform. I cannot quite remember who wrote it, but I commend it to colleagues.
To come back to the issue that I want to pursue, we already have set criteria for the creation of new SPCB-supported bodies. This committee’s purpose is to consider whether the criteria are still fit for purpose. I want to start by asking you all for your views on the criteria that need to be set. Are the existing criteria fit for purpose? If not, how do we ensure that, to address some of the concerns that you have raised, we are not overlapping functions that could be done by other bodies?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
That is a fair point, which we have previously heard made by other witnesses from whom we have taken evidence.
Reform Scotland’s written submission says that the criteria have not been followed, and the Parliament has just ignored them, which I think is probably fair comment. Can we produce criteria that will be solid enough?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
We should not just rule out new commissioners for the sake of it, as there might be a case for them.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
Thank you.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
I want to ask Matthew Gill about that aspect. In your 2023 report you proposed three new tests for establishing a public body, which involved considering effectiveness, independence and cost efficiency. What are your thoughts are on this issue and on the interaction with the current criteria that the Parliament has set?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
I do not want to put words in your mouth, but we are trying to extrapolate lessons for us from your research. In essence, are you saying that someone with a purely advocacy role is of limited value?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
You co-wrote a paper with Pamela Cox and Maurice Sunkin on the case for the Victims Commissioner for England and Wales. That is relevant because, right now, this Parliament is discussing a proposed victims and witnesses commissioner for Scotland. I think that the convener sits on the committee that is considering that bill, although I do not.
I read the paper with interest, and what really struck me was your conclusion. Forgive me for paraphrasing, and correct me if I have this wrong but, in effect, you put the question: if the new commissioner is not to be given statutory powers, is it really worth having him or her? For the benefit of the committee, will you elaborate a little on your thinking in reaching that conclusion?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Murdo Fraser
That leads me neatly on to my next question, which is about specific outputs. We took evidence from Leon Thompson from UK Hospitality. He said:
“Direct access to and engagement with ministers and cabinet secretaries has never really been the issue. The bit that has not always been there has been the Government’s understanding of the need to act in a way that supports our businesses. What we should be taking from the experience of the past two years and the new deal is the need for all our ministers and cabinet secretaries to be focused on economic growth and to have a clear understanding of how that fits with their portfolio responsibilities, so that everybody is moving in the same direction.”—[Official Report, Economy and Fair Work Committee, 26 February 2025; c 51.]
I am sure that you would agree with that. However, the fact that he told us that a few weeks ago suggests that he thinks that it is not happening.