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 2465 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
John Mason
Ernst & Young is a reputable company and, on the whole, I would tend to trust it. Did you accept that judgment at face value or did you do any digging below that?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
John Mason
Good morning. I was having a look at your latest financial statements, which I think are the July 2023 ones. Am I right in saying that the July 2024 ones have not yet been published?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
John Mason
Is the auditor still Ernst & Young?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
John Mason
I will pick out a few points out of the previous accounts that we have. The first is the auditor’s opinion that the university was still a going concern in July 2023—in fact, it presumably thought that it was still a concern in December, because it did not sign the accounts until then. It said:
“Based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the group and institution’s ability to continue as a going concern for the period to 31 July 2025”.
I presume that you and the auditors were happy with that statement. At December 2023, there were absolutely no worries about the university being a going concern. Is that correct?
09:30Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
John Mason
I do not mind who answers.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
John Mason
Following that line, if we expand the SFC’s remit too much to include spending, is there a danger that it will lose focus?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
John Mason
It has been quite a long meeting already, so I will try not to make it drag on too much longer.
We have mentioned public sector reform. There is talk of public sector reform at the UK level and its impact on the civil service. Would that have a knock-on effect in Scotland?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
John Mason
I suspect that that is an on-going thing, so we will maybe return to that in the future.
I go back to the Auditor General’s report. The second key message is:
“The Scottish Government continues to respond to emerging financial pressures ... The options being applied provide short-term relief, but their one-off nature means they do not address the overall unsustainable financial position for the Scottish public sector.”
Is it fair to say that we have
“an overall unsustainable financial position for the Scottish public sector”?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
John Mason
The Scottish Government has intervened in a number of cases involving private companies, and the report lists the values of some of those. For example, if I understand the figures correctly, the total financial investment in Glasgow Prestwick Airport Ltd has been £55.5 million, while its value in the accounts is £21.2 million. Can you or one of your colleagues comment on where that came from?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
John Mason
Okay. The report also says that there was a total financial investment of £304 million in Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Ltd, and that the value in the consolidated accounts is £94.6 million. That is a similar picture. It also says that the total investment in the Lochaber smelter is nil, and that the value of provision is £130 million. Lastly, it says that there was a total financial investment of £50 million in Burntisland Fabrications Ltd, and that the value in the accounts is nil. Those figures are all assessed and fixed—is that correct?