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 502 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
Academics from the University of Aberdeen and Abertay University, as well as R3, all said that the fiduciary nature of the judicial factor’s duties needed to be spelled out explicitly in legislation. Professor Grier also thought that a clear statement was needed as to the legal remedies if there were a breach of those duties. Does the commission have a view on that?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
That is why we were asking whether it should be in the bill that they have the—
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
For example, a factor who is put in place might also be thinking about the organisation’s reputation. It might be that, in strict financial terms, they could get a better return on investment by going with option 1, whereas option 2 might produce a lower short-term return but would be more consistent with the organisation’s values and wider public image. I guess that we were thinking about such a scenario in relation to trusts and succession.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
That is helpful—thank you.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
Part 2 of the bill proposes various powers and duties for a judicial factor. In response to the committee’s call for views, the Faculty of Advocates said that it would be desirable to give the judicial factor the additional
“power to seek directions from the appointing court”,
which could be used, for example, in the event of a dispute or uncertainty about what steps the factor should take. Would the commission like to comment on that as a policy idea?
10:45Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
So you would not think it appropriate in this case.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
Thank you.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
Thank you. In response to the committee’s call for views, the Law Society made the opposite challenge and thought that the bill’s requirements in section 15, on the duty to make a management plan, and section 16, on the duty to submit accounts to the Accountant of Court—I hope that my notes are right on this—were more prescriptive than those of the commission’s draft bill. Is the bill more prescriptive than the commission had in mind?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
My question follows on from what you said before. You said that although it does not happen all the time, the Law Society has to step in, or put a judicial factor in place, regrettably often. In the light of the McClure case and others, is there a conflict between the Law Society regulating the work of solicitors and it putting a factor in place to take over when something goes wrong? Was that considered in how the bill was drafted?
The bill seeks to consolidate the law, but there are still other pieces of legislation on the statute book that provide the power to appoint a judicial factor in specific circumstances. Was any thought given to bringing all that into this bill? Why did you not do that? As a result of that, are there still situations in which the responsibility for appointing a judicial factor is not as clear as it could be?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 April 2024
Oliver Mundell
You could have modified them.