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
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Liam Kerr
I have a brief question, which I will direct to Peter Bain, although others might want to comment on it.
Mr Greer asked about co-ordinated support plans. I have heard that there can be a disconnect between someone requiring a CSP and their actually getting it. I understand that there is a duty on the local authority to put one in place, if statutory conditions are met, but, anecdotally, I have heard that parents can be pushed from pillar to post as they try to get one for their child. Indeed, I have heard of its taking years—up to a decade—to happen. Can you help the committee understand who has responsibility for leading on making CSPs happen, so that they can be held accountable if they do not? Is there any truth to the suggestion that, perhaps because of underresourcing, local authorities might not be able either to assess conditions or to put such plans in place?
11:00Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Liam Kerr
I will ask Susan Quinn a very brief question. How many hours of specialist ASN training is given during the postgraduate diploma in education? I have heard anecdotally that it could be between one and three hours. Can you confirm or deny that?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
Of course, but with respect, I ask the minister to take another intervention. Willie Rennie raised a very important point. In the next 15 minutes, we will be asked to agree this section, presumably—
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
It is important that I come in here because this group of amendments concerns the operation and impact of the bill. Significant concerns have been raised by experts that sections 12 and 13, concerning restrictions on reporting, are overbroad, unworkable and a significant restriction on media freedoms. Above all, they may well be non-compliant with articles 10 and 8 of the ECHR, and therefore the bill, when it becomes an act, may be inoperable—hence my intervention here.
The committee must concern itself with assisting the Government to avoid passing any more legislation that is unlawful or inoperable and that might ultimately be subject to costly challenge. Therefore, I will put specific questions and request answers to each one in order to seek reassurance for the committee.
Has legal advice been taken specifically on sections 12 and 13? If so, were experts in media law part of that? If so, can we see that advice to reassure ourselves? If not, what will the Government do prior to stage 3 regarding the legality of sections 12 and 13 to ensure that Parliament does not inadvertently pass legally incompetent provisions?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
We are not being asked to agree sections 12 and 13; we are being asked to agree section 27 or 28—something like that—on the impact and operation of the bill. In response to what I thought was a very reasonable intervention from Willie Rennie, the minister said, “We will come back to you at stage 3,” but in 15 minutes we will be asked to agree the section on the impact and operation of the bill. I am concerned that the answer that the committee has heard from the minister about going away and dealing with the issue at stage 3—I am paraphrasing—is not sufficient to allow the committee to come to a view. I simply make that point.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
May I respond, convener?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
With respect, did the advice on sections 12 and 13 specifically say that they will be legally competent, and was that advice from experts in media law?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 7 February 2024
Liam Kerr
I am not sure whether Mr Marra will talk specifically about taking forward his amendment 217 with the minister. For when the bill comes to stage 3, what reassurance has he had about the competency and workability of that amendment? Earlier, the minister made reasonable comments about whether there is a risk of imposing a duty that cannot be fulfilled, particularly given what was said about provision elsewhere. Has the member got that reassurance? If not, will he seek it in his further conversations with the minister?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
I could do, convener, but, with respect, I think that you just need to call the amendments. You proposed putting the question to the amendments en bloc, and I have objected to that.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
I am grateful for the intervention, but I do not think that the amendment would create that duplication. First, it would allow the statement to be made when the court has remitted a case following conviction, and secondly, it would allow the passage of time to be observed. We should remember that the amendment would give the victim the opportunity to make a victim impact statement, instead of imposing an obligation in that respect. That choice will still be there, but the amendment provides an important right to the victim. Should they need to update any previous victim impact statement as a result of, say, some post-traumatic event, it gives them the opportunity to do so.
As I said, I am grateful for the intervention, but I think that I have answered the point in my response.