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 888 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
I have not finished what I was going to say. Some people would want to know and others would not, but that is not the point of amendment 1040.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
As I have already said about amendment 1040, I am not saying that the principle of what Graham Simpson is saying does not have some merit, but that is not where the issue fits into our criminal justice process, which is why I have concerns.
I also have concerns about amendment 1038, because it could restrict the offences for which the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service could offer fiscal fines. During evidence, we heard concerns about a potential increase in the gravity of the offences that fiscal fines could be used for, but we have to trust the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to act in the interests of justice, as I believe it always does. Therefore, I do not support amendment 1038.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
I know that and was coming to it, but thanks for that clarification. I am aware that amendment 1036 is about people who are in custody, but we are talking about the various angles on that. Jamie Greene mentioned to you the police concerns about resourcing. The Government amendments 1005 to 1007 strike the right balance and I support them.
On Jamie Greene’s amendment 1010 and Katy Clark’s amendment 1034, it goes without saying that we all want reporting mechanisms in place that allow us to get a sense of what is going on. We have had a couple of years of doing virtual trials, hearings and appearances in court but it is still not a load of time. Therefore, the cabinet secretary’s offer to Jamie Greene is valuable. I hope that Jamie Greene will take that up when he considers whether to move amendment 1010. There should be no doubt that the Government and all members of the committee want to get the best information about how virtual appearances and hearings are working.
I support the Government amendments 1005 to 1007. A good offer has been made to Jamie Greene.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
Okay; I had not started on amendment 1038.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
Good morning. We took a lot of evidence last week on the issue of prisons in relation to the bill. I give credit to the clerks that you are here at the right time for us to follow up on what we heard last week, and I will follow on from my colleague Pam Gosal’s line of questioning on one of the concerns that we heard. The whole purpose of the GRC is, of course, to make the process easier. This is a theoretical question and might be difficult to answer fully, but, based on your experience in the Prison Service, do you think that more people in the prison population will seek a GRC if the bill is passed?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
Good morning. I have questions on two provisions in the bill: the provision on living in the acquired gender for three months, and the proposed three-month reflection period.
On the provision on living in the acquired gender for three months, we have heard quite a lot of evidence that suggests that that is unnecessary, both from those who generally support the bill and from those who have concerns about the bill. I am happy to hear from the witnesses in any order, but I will start with Anthony Horan, as that is the order that we have used so far. Anthony, what are your thoughts on that specific provision?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
I will come back to you on that separately. Chris and Fraser, do you have anything to add?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
As well as the potential for an increase in applications for GRCs, it is about bad-faith actors: people applying for a GRC to increase the likelihood of their being moved to another prison setting from the one that they are in, for untoward reasons. Are the policies and procedures that you have in place now robust enough to deal with that scenario? I believe that a witness last week said that it is not likely to occur often, but it could occur, and we need to be aware of that. Are your procedures able to deal with that scenario even if the bill is passed?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
Thank you very much for that answer, but before I bring in the other panellists, I should perhaps expand my question a wee bit. I hope that I am not misquoting either side of the debate—I do not think that I am—but, generally speaking, those who are in favour of the bill and its provisions worry that such a period is unnecessary in itself, because the people concerned have been living like this for a long time.
Whether we are talking about three months or two years, though, this is a big, life-changing decision, and those with some concerns about the bill are perhaps concerned about the term “acquired gender” and how it might be defined. Maybe I should have given a bit more of an explanation with my previous question, although I appreciate Anthony Horan’s answer. What are the Rev Karen Hendry’s thoughts?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 7 June 2022
Fulton MacGregor
I have a final question, if that is all right, convener. We spoke about the current policies in the Prison Service, and it was good and reassuring to hear those. It was also helpful to hear the up-to-date position. Will the bill have an impact on how you will manage the situation for people with a GRC and, if so, what will that impact be? Are you confident in being able to manage that?