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 1100 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
On that exact point, with regard to making decisions and the lack of evidence, you mentioned that the powers available to judges in England are different to those that are available in Scotland in relation to evidence and the ability to deal with the matter. Stuart Munro, I presume that it cannot be as simple as mapping the English system, say, on to the Scottish system without consideration of the wider powers that are available to judges. If that is right, is there a more general risk that this Parliament is being asked to legislate on cornerstones of the system without fully appreciating those wider powers, such as are available to judges in England but not to judges in Scotland?
12:15Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
Simon Brown, on that point, the burden of proof in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt, such that, if there is any reasonable doubt, the accused must be acquitted. Are you aware of any other two-verdict system in which it could be suggested that 10 out of 15 jurors would mean that the decision met that burden?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
Stuart Munro, in your opening remarks you talked about a significant judicial ruling in October that seems to have had far-reaching consequences for the court’s view of corroboration in criminal cases, such that a number of cases that would previously have had insufficient evidence might progress to prosecution. That is my reading of it, but you will tell me if I have reflected that wrongly. To pick up on your earlier comments, what impact does that decision have on safeguards, and what impact might it have on taking away what you describe as the key cornerstone of not proven?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
Good morning. I will throw this question to Sandy Brindley straight away, because that was a really important point that she just made. I will follow on from Pauline McNeill’s questioning. The uniqueness of the system in Scotland involves the three verdicts, the jury size and corroboration. If the system is not considered holistically and, in the absence of the evidence that Sandy Brindley rightly flagged in her previous answer, if the bill were to proceed with the removal of the third verdict, is there a risk of unintended consequences that would make the system unbalanced or, indeed, worse for the people who you are talking about?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
On the prosecution of murder, I recall that, in its stage 1 report, the committee recommended amending the bill to ensure that any case involving a charge of murder is still prosecuted in the High Court. However, the cabinet secretary’s letter does not indicate that the Government plans to amend the bill in that way. Do either of you take a view on that? If so, do you prefer the committee’s suggestion or the Government’s apparent direction of travel?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
That is clear—thank you.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
Good morning. I remind the committee, witnesses and anyone who is watching of my interests, in that I am a practising solicitor and I am regulated by the Law Society of Scotland.
At stage 1, the cabinet secretary told the committee—these are my words—that the system needs to be considered holistically, such that, if you remove the not proven verdict, you need to do something with the jury size, for example. That view was reflected in Stuart Munro’s opening remarks.
Now, of course, the cabinet secretary is winding back on jury size but increasing the majority that is needed for a conviction. Michael Meehan, in the faculty’s view, does adding two to the majority provide sufficient safeguards in light of the removal of the verdict? Is there any evidence to suggest that a two-thirds majority is appropriate in a two-verdict system?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
I am, but I am speaking more widely, too. The cabinet secretary has made proposals in her letter about changing certain aspects of the bill as it was introduced. When you were looking at that, did you think, “Hang on, that will have a cost implication for our organisation or the sector more generally,” and, if so, do you think that that will be factored in by the cabinet secretary?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
I am very grateful for that.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 December 2024
Liam Kerr
Kate Wallace, do you want to add to that?