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 3461 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 April 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Agenda item 2 is consideration of new petitions. As I always do for the benefit of those who might be following our proceedings, I want first of all to indicate that we take soundings in relation to petitions and seek, in particular, an initial view from the Scottish Government and the Parliament’s impartial research service to ensure that, even at the start of our consideration, we have some informed opinion.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 April 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I would very much like the letter to be framed in the context of the evidence that we heard during the session, in particular, because I would like Police Scotland to be aware that we heard quite harrowing testimony that we found compelling and that is what underpins our questions. We are not just asking them because we feel that we should ask something; we are asking them because we really feel motivated to do so, given the experience that we heard about from Stephanie Bonner. Are we agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 April 2023
Jackson Carlaw
In what way is the office of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner able to directly intervene in the way that the issue is progressed or understood?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 April 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I call Fergus Ewing.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 19 April 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Megan, will you take the lead on that question?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 22 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
The petition raises important issues. We will write to the minister and to the Scottish Social Services Council, as suggested, and consider the petition again when we consider the responses that we have received from them.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 22 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I am very concerned that I have now planted the word “capture” in your vocabulary, Mr Stewart. You are now capturing everything in every petition. I encourage you not to be led down such a dangerous path, but I fully support the sentiments.
That round-table discussion, however, was 14 months ago, and I will tell you what struck me. First of all, this Parliament has a duty to try to ensure that, although the composition of its membership is not youthful, we understand and respond to issues that are of direct concern to many young people, and this clearly is one such issue. In my ignorance, I had assumed that a urine test was probably a fairly routine process, but I was struck by the issue of there being possible reputational damage done to the individual in question, who was thereafter unable to evidence that their drink had been spiked, that was the issue, and that, as a consequence, it was open to others to suggest that they had just been irresponsible or reckless in their behaviour. That was very damaging, and it would be avoidable if processes were in place to try to properly identify the experience that people had been subject to. I think that we are all minded to pursue the petition further and to make inquiries. Mr Ewing suggested contacting Police Scotland, which is perfectly sensible.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 22 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Thank you. I note the reference in the briefing that we received to the October 2021 case that was heard in the High Court in respect of the UK Secretary of State for Health, in which an effort to strike down section 1(1)(d) of the 1967 act was dismissed. At that time, the court dismissed the argument that that section of the act perpetuated negative stereotypes of people with disabilities as it focuses more on the rights of the pregnant person and their medical treatment. I found the briefing interesting in presenting different sides of the argument that the petitioner was seeking to represent, which, in itself, was well expressed.
We have heard Carol Mochan’s position. Do other colleagues have any suggestions? It appears not. Carol Mochan proposes that, in this instance, particularly given the Scottish Government’s position that it does not intend to amend the Abortion Act 1967, there is nothing that the committee can meaningfully do to pursue the petition and we should therefore close it. Are we agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 22 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I agree. Do we have any other suggestions? As there are none, are we content to keep the petition open and proceed on the basis that Mr Ewing has advocated?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 22 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
It might be worth asking Police Scotland to reflect on its previous response, in which it said:
“there are no known cases where a biological male has been charged with the physical crime of rape and has self-identified as a woman.”
That might have been its view at the time, but, as the Parliament knows from subsequent events, it is not a robust basis on which to form a policy judgment. Police Scotland wrote to us in January 2022, so we might want to hear from it further on that, as well as from the board, as Carol Mochan suggested.
Are we content to invite the petitioners to meet the committee when we have received responses to the various further inquiries that we will make? At this stage, are we content to approach the relevant bodies that have been suggested?
Members indicated agreement.