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 1331 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Liam Kerr
Good morning. For my first question, Pam Gosal, I would like to go back to the convener’s original question, just to drill into something.
The University of Essex research into a register for domestic abuse and stalking offences in England and Wales concluded that
“it seems evident that a register alone is unlikely to bring significant improvements in the criminal justice system’s response to high risk and serial domestic abuse and stalking perpetrators”.
Can you produce evidence that counters that assertion?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Liam Kerr
Yes, but we need evidence that it would work. The problem that the committee has is that we have heard evidence that it would not work, but I take your point about the study. If it has not been submitted already, perhaps you could send that to us.
I see that you might want to come back in. Let me ask a further question and then you could address the first point. We have also had evidence that the definition that is used in your bill of domestic abuse offenders does not capture the totality of risk. It might create a two-tier system for domestic abuse offenders, and it might be lead to an inconsistent definition of domestic abuse in Scotland. What is your response to that evidence?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Liam Kerr
I will press you on that, because it is important and I want to give you the best chance to counter what the committee has heard. The question that I put to you was that we have had evidence that there might be serious unintended consequences if your bill was to pass. We can all see that the bill has the best of intentions, but we have heard evidence that it might have serious unintended consequences, so I want to give you the opportunity to say whether you can give the committee any evidence that those unintended consequences will not come to pass and that, if the bill’s provisions are brought in, the reverse will happen and the hoped-for consequences will come to pass.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Liam Kerr
My final question is on something that I have asked about in previous weeks. The committee has heard that there might be unintended consequences if the bill passes. For example, victims might have a false sense of security, there might be fewer guilty pleas and there might be an increase in disputes in trials about sensitive information. In particular, there might be an increased risk of retaliation, given that a victim might stay with their partner following their conviction. The committee will be worried about that. Can you produce evidence to counter those concerns?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 January 2026
Liam Kerr
I am very grateful.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Liam Kerr
I am grateful.
09:30Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Liam Kerr
I have one more question. Some domestic abuse organisations and, indeed, the member in charge of the bill have said that the notification requirements could act as a deterrent to domestic abuse offenders. The Crown Office and Police Scotland have said that they have not seen an evidence base for that, so it is crucial that the committee understands the issue. What are your views on that, minister? Do you think that there is a read-across from the deterrent value of the sex offenders register?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Liam Kerr
Thank you. I would like to follow up on something that Jeff Gibbons just said. You have both spoken about the disclosure scheme for domestic abuse Scotland—DSDAS. In your letter, minister, you talk about holding
“a workshop in September to recognise the 10 years that the Scheme has been in operation and to consider what more could enhance its operation further.”
To reassure the committee, could you give us a more detailed update on that and any work that you have planned in relation to the disclosure scheme, given that we have received specific evidence that there is a lack of awareness of the scheme?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Liam Kerr
Good morning. I want to go back to your opening remarks, minister. You said that the bill will not achieve what it intends to and that it lacks an evidence base, at least in relation to part 1. I am sure that you will acknowledge that many individual respondents to the committee’s call for views said that they feel let down by the current justice system and feel unsafe. Might the provisions in part 1 go at least some way to preventing or reducing incidents of domestic abuse and making victims feel safer? If not, what is the Scottish Government doing as an alternative?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Liam Kerr
I understand.