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 1353 contributions
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Maybe we should start with Adam, since he was looking bemused.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
The Scottish Government is spending £1.4 billion more on social security than it received in the block grant adjustment. If that additional spending affects the group that you represent, how does it do so?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I have a final question. In the next few months, the winter heating payment and the carers additional person payment will be introduced, and there is the possibility of the two-child limit on payments being mitigated. Given the financial context that we are in, do any of you have a view on the priorities for those particular payments? Are there other priorities that could or should be met as well?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I am done with my questions, deputy convener. I should have declared that I am on ADP at the higher rate.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Does anyone else want to come in on that point?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
First, I think that we would all want to give a big thank you to Edel Harris for all the work that she and her colleagues have done. It will be interesting to see how not just the Government, but every political party, responds to your review. We could spend the next 12 hours discussing it, but I suspect that I will not be allowed to do that, so I will limit myself to a couple of questions.
Your report talks about the 50 per cent rule, fluctuating conditions and the 20m mobility rule. If I were to lock you in a room and say, “You can’t come out until you tell us the first thing from your listening exercise that you would do”, what, from all the good stuff that you have produced, would be the one thing that you think the disability community would want to happen first?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Thank you. We could discuss that issue for a long time, but I will leave it there for the moment.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I think that Emma Jackson might want to come in. She was nodding, but I do not know whether she wants to say anything.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
My final question is probably slightly more controversial. Your report says that face-to-face consultations
“play an important role in the decision-making process.”
Many people—we heard this from Emma Jackson—have had a bad experience when they have gone for their face-to-face PIP consultation. Is it possible to devise a scheme with face-to-face consultations that are not quite as confrontational or uncomfortable as the ones that many claimants have experienced? I am interested to hear your view on that. Often, if you meet somebody face to face, you can get a better view of how the disability actually affects them. Perhaps that is why so many people are successful at appeals, because they are seen by people rather than their case just being read on paper. Is it possible to devise such a scheme while making sure that people feel comfortable with it?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 September 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Once she has heard my question, she might not want to take it.
I welcome the witnesses—thank you for coming. I absolutely agree with everything that you have said so far about social security being an investment. I should remind members that I am on ADP myself.
Going back to what Chris Birt, Emma Jackson and others have said, I would say that we want to focus on the most needy people in society and ensure that those who are the most vulnerable are able to get the most. However, any social investment comes with a cost, and we have all seen the figures for where the money will go over the next few years. Have you given any thought to how the money might be targeted better, so that, say, people who are on higher incomes might not get it, particularly ADP? I know that there are issues with how we would do that, with passporting benefits and so on, but, in principle, do you think that would it be better to take that social investment and use it in a different way to give more to those in need, rather than necessarily giving it to someone like me, who is on a reasonably good salary? Has any thinking been done on that?