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 927 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Fulton MacGregor
Good morning. This is giving me flashbacks to stage 1 and the enormity of the decision. As you heard earlier, it is clear that victims groups feel that moving to the proposed 10 out of 15 would be worse for victims. That is a compelling case, but we have heard another compelling case from you that other systems work effectively with near unanimity. Where do you think the Government got that suggestion? From a lay perspective, it feels like—I am sure that when the Government speaks to us about this, it will tell me that I am totally wrong—it is trying to please both points of view but is running the risk of not satisfying anybody. What is the thinking behind that, from a legal point of view?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Fulton MacGregor
To go back to Rona Mackay’s question, is it such a bad thing? Could such a set-up have really negative consequences, or could it work and be a fair justice system? Do you know what I am getting at?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Fulton MacGregor
You said something earlier, Simon, about the comparison of the conviction rates in Scotland and England. In England, there is a “better”—I put that in inverted commas—conviction rate. Is there a risk of Scotland’s not having a similar rate? Could having unanimity lead to more convictions and alleviate the concerns of victims organisations?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
That is fair enough.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
The committee is aware that the SPSO has some very poor Trustpilot scores and reviews, and those have been highlighted by a recent petitioner to the Parliament. Can you give us any indication of how the committee might get a fuller picture of what the public perception is? It is possibly a wee bit in contrast to your own submissions.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
I do not want to put you on the spot, but are you able to give a practical example of where the own-initiative power might be used?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
That is really interesting. Thank you.
09:45Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
Thanks very much. My next question is for Paul Blaker and Peter Stewart-Blacker. I think that you almost come at my earlier question in reverse. You refer to the high rate of complaints that have been upheld—they are, therefore, complaints that have gone through the SPSO’s investigation stage—and you suggest that that indicates that many public bodies are still “getting it wrong”. Could you elaborate your thinking on that?
10:45Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
I thank all the witnesses for their evidence so far. Last year, before I was a member of the committee, the ombudsman told the committee:
“we see good complaints handling in the first instance.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 5 December 2023; c 9.]
That was in relation to public bodies. Do you agree that that is one of the reasons why complaints are not fully progressed through every stage? Before you came to the meeting, I said that that is not what I, as an MSP, tend to see, but, given what the witnesses on the previous panel said, I am quite willing to accept that that might be because I see only people who are very unhappy and come to me for a bit of advice and support. However, my experience as an MSP does not back that up.
I will direct that question to Jan Savage, Adam Stachura and Fiona Collie, because my second question will probably be for Peter Stewart-Blacker and Paul Blaker, who can come in at that point.
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee
Meeting date: 26 November 2024
Fulton MacGregor
I want to ask you something else before I bring in Fiona Collie. Is there an impact based on the scale of seriousness, if that is the right term? Is the ombudsman able to say with confidence that investigations by public bodies are, in the main, done well? Is there a seriousness scale? The cases that eventually come to me, as an MSP—I am sure that it is the same for the charities that are represented today—seem to be quite serious and complex. Is there an issue in that regard? Is it the case that public bodies deal with the less serious cases pretty well and quickly but that things become more difficult as you go up that scale?