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 3204 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Okay. What you conclude from that is that you feel that the evidence base is subjective rather than objective and that, for want of a better description, NatureScot is cherry picking in where it is looking to find its evidence, rather than drawing that evidence out from the broadest possible base.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Mhairi Dawson, I will follow up on one of your responses to David Torrance, when you got almost quite emotional and passionate about the division that the issue has created. Will you illustrate how that has manifested?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Are members content with that?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
What evidence is available on the environmental and socioeconomic impacts that the existing national parks have been able to generate? That seems to be one of the issues relating to the parks. Did any of the evidence that existed inform the development of this proposal? Where there was no evidence, where was the information about and support for the proposal drawn from?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Only as you feel necessary.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
I wonder whether colleagues would be content for us to frame this with slightly stronger language—to say that the committee is concerned about what appears to be growing evidence of a lack of urgency behind the will to take forward the issues. Given that we all support a preventative health agenda, the provision of defibrillators not only saves lives but is, potentially, through preventing the subsequent need for hospital admission and other interventions, a preventative measure that we should encourage. Taken together with the evidence that we heard on the petition in relation to schools—that Scotland seems to be lagging significantly behind the rest of the UK, for whatever reason—it seems that the impetus is just not being put into this programme in Scotland. Are members content to frame our questions in that way?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
The committee is persuaded that there are issues, and I am not satisfied that just being told that everything is as it should be by all the organisations that currently operate matters is sufficient comfort to the committee.
Is the committee content to keep the petition open and to pursue the avenues of inquiry that we have discussed?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
The next continued petition, PE2039, which was lodged by Amy Lee, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to pay student nurses for their placement hours. We last considered this petition at our meeting on 20 December 2023, when we agreed to write to the Nursing and Midwifery Council, the Royal College of Nursing and the National Union of Students. The Royal College of Nursing’s response emphasises the importance of student nurses having supernumerary status, as that means that they must not be counted as part of the workforce that is required to provide patient care. The submission states that, for that reason, the RCN does not support students being paid while on clinical placement.
In a 2022 RCN members survey, 46 per cent of respondents said that, on their last shift, nursing students were being counted as staff in terms of the numbers required to provide patient care, and the submission states that, although RCN Scotland does not support student nurses being paid while on clinical placement, it is clear that the Scottish Government must ensure that nursing students have appropriate financial support to allow them to prioritise their education, cope with the rising cost of living and complete their studies without falling into financial hardship.
The RCN’s report on nursing student finance said that 66 per cent of respondents had considered dropping out of their course due to financial concerns, and it recommended that
“Scottish government must implement a cost-of-living increase to the nursing student bursary and associated allowances, and establish a regular review to ensure the bursary increases in line with the cost of living.”
Do colleagues have any suggestions for action?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Mr Kempe, I have not had a chance to hear from you. Would like to say anything in relation to our commentary?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 30 October 2024
Jackson Carlaw
I am speaking in an entirely personal capacity, but we have had NatureScot before us in relation to other petitions and I have found it to be deeply unconvincing and totally unpersuasive. When I hear NatureScot being mentioned, it does not sing to me as an organisation that is always in touch with the aims of petitions. That is my view; I cannot speak on behalf of the committee when I say that.
Mr Lucas, is there anything that you would like to contribute?