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 3738 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
We thank the petitioner for raising the issue with us. As with all petitions that are closed, if, in due course, the petitioner feels that the commitments or evidence that we have received do not lead to a satisfactory outcome, they are entitled to bring the issue back by way of a fresh petition after 12 months.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
PE1939, lodged by Suzanne Thornton, calls on the Scottish Government to demonstrate a commitment to health equality for young males born between 1 September 1997 and 1 September 2006 by allowing them to access the human papillomavirus vaccine via the national health service.
We previously considered the petition on 26 October 2022. At that point, we agreed to write to various organisations to gather further information on the issues raised. Members will be aware from our papers that we have received responses from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, Young Scot and the Teenage Cancer Trust. Importantly, in its response, the JCVI set out the reasons why a time-limited catch-up programme for boys was not pursued when the HPV vaccination was extended in 2018. The reasons provided included the different epidemiological situation now compared with when the programme for girls was launched; the good levels of herd immunity as a result of the girls’ programme; and the priority of extending the routine adolescent programme to boys while maintaining high uptake among girls. The JCVI also states that it has no plans to review the need for and value of a catch-up of the HPV immunisation programme for males aged 25 and under, as it believes that that would not be cost-effective.
I also draw members’ attention to the response from the Teenage Cancer Trust, which notes a disparity between the uptake rates of vaccination between males and females of 7.9 per cent and calls for the Scottish Government to include plans for monitoring uptake to be included in the 10-year cancer strategy.
Do members have any comments or suggestions?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
No, that is a fair point. Mr Stewart, are you happy for us to leave the petition open while we pursue that point?
I note also the Teenage Cancer Trust recommendation in relation to the 10-year cancer strategy and the disparity that the trust had identified. That is not so much something for a response, but we should certainly write to the Scottish Government to draw its attention to the Teenage Cancer Trust’s representation.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 March 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Yes.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Given your experience—I now have some direct experience, as well—in what way did you find that the inability to access this particular treatment resulted in a different pathway through and out of the pandemic to that of other people? Clearly, bigger concerns still rested with people who are immunosuppressed, even as they saw everybody else acting more normally.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I am grateful for that. Implicit in what you are saying is a sense among the community of those who are affected in this way that the lighthouse of public attention has maybe swung away and people who are in this position are left to cope on their own, without the same attention that there was when this was a much more general and widespread affliction that was being felt by a much wider community across the country. I appreciate and understand that.
To move away from anything that is so personal to you, do you have any knowledge of whether immunosuppressed people have disproportionately experienced morbidity as a result of the pandemic, or does the exceptional care that they are having to take make it difficult to draw any statistical conclusion or evidence in that regard?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Various members of the committee have at different times served on the Parliament’s health committee, so we are familiar with the commissioning process and the way in which these things progress. From time to time, we have all lodged questions to ministers about the availability of product and, of course, they have always deferred to NICE, the Scottish Medicines Consortium and the processes that are at play in that regard.
I suppose that ministers’ argument would be that, were they to act by exception, that would be at the cost of diverting resource away from treatments that have been through the commissioning process and been recommended to them. What would you say to them, as ministers who have to come to decisions in relation to the commissioning authorities, in the face of that conundrum?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I understand. Essentially, you feel that Evusheld should be the subject of the same emergency provisions as applied at the height of the pandemic, in order to accelerate consideration.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
That does help. I think that we agree to write to various organisations, in the first instance. That wee synopsis is good context for us when we consider the issue as we proceed. Are members content to proceed on that basis?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Jackson Carlaw
That brings us to PE1982, which has been lodged by Gary McKay. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review the funding that is provided to the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland to enable more places to be made available to Scottish students pursuing ballet at that level.
The Scottish Parliament information centre briefing states that higher education institutions are autonomous bodies, although they receive significant funding from the Scottish Government. It notes that the Scottish Government does not direct how many funded places individual universities make available, and that it is unable to intervene in internal institutional matters. In 2021, funding was provided to the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland that provided 30 places for Scotland-domiciled students studying dance. The response from the Scottish Government reiterates the technical points and notes that universities are able to offer as many places to international students as they wish.
We have received a submission from the petitioner that highlights the issue of opportunity for Scottish dancers to continue in further ballet education. He shares his view that the current set-up provides a means for increased business turnover and focus on financial interests. The petitioner raises concerns about the financial burden that is faced by students who might have no choice but to study outside Scotland as a result of limited places at the Royal Conservatoire.
Do members have any comments? I appreciate the general point that the petitioner is making about international students absorbing many available places.