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 2221 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Does the committee wish to draw its correspondence to the attention of the lead committee, noting that the Scottish Government intends to correct the error in the signing copy of the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
The amending instrument is intended to correct errors that the Scottish Government identified in Town and Country Planning (Fees for Appeals) (Scotland) Regulations 2025.
Section 28(2) of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 requires that a negative instrument must be laid before the Scottish Parliament at least 28 days before it comes into force.
This instrument was laid on 29 May 2025 and it came into force on 8 June 2025, which was less than 28 days later.
Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament under reporting ground (j), which is the failure to comply with the laying requirements?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Does the committee wish to make it clear that it is not expressing a view on the proposed method of correction?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Welcome to the 20th meeting in 2025 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. I remind everyone to switch off or put to silent their mobile phones and other electronic devices.
The first item of business is a decision on whether to take in private items 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Is the committee content to take those items in private?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
The purpose of the instrument is to give effect to the recommendations in a Boundaries Scotland report on its review of the boundaries of the Scottish Parliament’s constituencies and regions.
The committee asked the Scottish Government about an issue arising in the instrument’s preamble, which suggests that both the draft order and the report require approval by resolution in the Parliament. The report requires only to be laid, and there is no requirement in the parent act for a motion to approve it.
In its response, the Scottish Government agreed that the report does not require approval and stated its intention to correct the preamble to make the position clear before the draft instrument is submitted to His Majesty in council.
Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on the general reporting ground because of the error in the preamble?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Under agenda item 3, we are considering one instrument, on which a point has been raised.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Under agenda item 4, we are considering one instrument, on which no points have been raised.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
That is helpful.
I turn to governance. Paragraph 30 of your report seems to demonstrate that there was poor communication and that some individuals failed to carry out the roles that were expected of them. Given that two years have elapsed since the issue came to light, are you assured that steps have been taken to ensure that such a situation will not arise again?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
Before I ask those questions, I want to go back to the line of questioning from Colin Beattie and Graham Simpson. Bearing in mind that various lockdowns took place between 2020 and May 2023, was Covid ever brought up during your audit work and engagement with the college? It did not come up in the report, and it has not come up so far in this evidence session.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Stuart McMillan
That is certainly something that would be worth while to look at if you could send that to the committee—thank you.
Paragraphs 32 to 37 of your report cover the complex issues that relate to the qualified opinion on the college’s accounts. Can you provide further detail on the key stakeholders that the college reported those issues to?