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 1953 contributions
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Victor, your mandate stresses the importance of respecting regional, cultural and religious values in human rights. How will the gender reform self-identification system impact everyone’s human rights across the UK?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Yes, Reem, we can hear you.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
That is fine, thank you.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Welcome, Reem. You mentioned that you have concerns with age. Do you agree with lowering the age from 18 to 16?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Thank you, Reem. I totally respect what you just said.
In your letter, you advised the Scottish Government to pause the bill. However, given that we will be voting on the bill over the next two days, do you personally have confidence that MSPs who are not part of this committee and are not on this call will have time to adequately consider the evidence that you are giving today?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
In your letter, you also raised concerns that the views of women’s groups and others who are critical of the bill had not been adequately considered in the bill process. Do you think that these last-minute committee sessions have done or will do anything to rectify that, particularly for the women whom you discuss, who feel that their protections are threatened by the potential for predatory men to access single-sex spaces, or have concerns around spaces becoming mixed sex and women then choosing to self-exclude?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
No.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
No—
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I want to pick up on one point that you made. Obviously, we want to ensure that there is a balance and that women’s rights, safety and privacy are protected, which was not addressed in your submission to the committee.
I want to ask you about the countries that currently have legal recognition of gender-based self-identification. Are there concrete examples that show that that has reduced the number of acts of violence against trans people?
I recognise that you are discussing here—[Interruption.] Did you understand the question? I am sorry about that.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 19 December 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Thank you, Victor, for coming to the committee this evening to give evidence. I want to speak to you about the intervention from your counterpart: the UN special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem. She said that her safeguarding fears were
“based on empirical evidence that ... the majority of sex offenders are male, and that persistent sex offenders will go to great lengths to gain access to those they wish to abuse.”
She is right, is she not? We are all aware of countless examples of the lengths that repeat sex offenders go to in order to access potential victims.
First, can you tell me why you think that the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill as it stands will not be similarly abused by violent sex offenders if vital safeguards are removed? Secondly, if you say that that is a possibility, would you agree that a safeguard to prevent convicted sex offenders from applying for a gender recognition certificate is a reasonable and necessary measure?