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 1654 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Ross Greer
That is great. I appreciate that.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
I would like to stick with the property questions. Professor Mathieson, you have mentioned that there is an assessment of the university’s property portfolio going on. Could you give us a bit of detail on that? Given that there is significant distress among your workforce at the moment about the potential redundancies, it would be useful to know how the assessment of the property portfolio fits in with wider cost-saving measures. Are you expecting a report to go to the university court some time soon with an assessment of the portfolio and what assets might be disposed of? Could you give us a little bit more detail on how that aspect of it is being assessed?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
No, but it can be a piece of the puzzle. There is no single solution. Actually, the single solution to solving your problem in one go would be to make a vast number of your staff redundant, but I suggest that would have significant negative consequences. Given that, and given my suggestion that no stone should be left unturned, are you making an assessment of all your assets, not just your property portfolio?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
Is that an active consideration?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
My next point is not unrelated to the point that you have made about maintenance. The capital depreciation figure in your accounts seems to have gone up significantly in recent years. Obviously, the increase will not be even, year on year, given the nature of capital budgets, full stop, as well as the factors that are involved in depreciation in particular. However, the figure seems to have risen significantly. In three years, it goes from £60 million to £117 million—that is the projection for the year after next—so it is nearly doubling. Do you have any detail on why the depreciation figure appears to be rising consistently and quite rapidly?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
I accept that that reduces the deficit and, at best, buys you time. However, buying time is not in and of itself an effective activity. I am just a little concerned. Although the exercise that your estates director is doing is useful, it does not sound as if there is a particular timescale attached to it. You are moving forward with redundancy processes and staff are facing the prospect of losing their jobs. If I were in your position, I would want a bit of urgency behind the estates review—that work should not just involve property; I will come to other assets in a minute—so that I know what are my options are other than losing staff.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
What timescale are you attaching to that exercise, and how does it sit alongside the timescale for staff redundancy processes?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
Absolutely. I acknowledge that. I am just looking to make sure that no stone is left unturned.
As well as your property portfolio, the university has other assets that are not property. Are you assessing all of that? I recognise that the scales here are quite different, but yours is one of a number of universities that hold a number of pieces of artwork, for example. It is perfectly legitimate to argue that it is a public good for the university to have that art, rather than for it be sold to a private collector, which would mean that the public loses access to it. However, given the financial situation that the university is in, does your assessment of all your assets go as far as non-property assets, such as artwork?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
I have a final question. I take on board everything that you have already said about your own salary package. You acknowledged to the convener at the start of the evidence session the 5 per cent salary increase that you received at the start of the financial year. I accept your point that your salary alone—even if you were paid nothing—will not close a deficit of tens of millions of pounds. However, do you believe that your 5 per cent salary uplift is worth the damage that it causes to staff morale and confidence? That decision and decisions like it are seen by staff as emblematic of a wider problem of senior management insulating themselves from the challenges that the rest of the institution is facing. Was that 5 per cent increase worth it, given the upset and distress that it has caused to staff who face the prospect of losing their jobs entirely?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Ross Greer
To you and to the wider senior management team, but to you as the individual at the top of the institution who accepted it. Do you think that it was worth it? Let us leave aside whether you think that it was a benefit to you. Do you think that it is worth it to the institution for decisions like that to be made?