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 1017 contributions
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Karen Adam
That is helpful. Thank you, minister.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Karen Adam
That was helpful. Thank you.
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Karen Adam
I was going to ask about those difficult implications. Can you give us some examples?
Rural Affairs and Islands Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Karen Adam
Thank you, convener, and good morning to the panel. I want to thank you for your contributions thus far—they have been very helpful.
Why has the sunset clause in the Agriculture (Retained EU Law and Data) (Scotland) Act 2020 act not been included in the bill? Why is it not appropriate?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 28 November 2023
Karen Adam
That is helpful. Thank you.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 28 November 2023
Karen Adam
Thank you for your evidence thus far. It has been really interesting, particularly given our previous evidence session. It has been really helpful to have the two sessions side by side.
My first question follows on from Meghan Gallacher’s questions. What are your views on the Scottish Government’s proposal to amend the bill so that some powers would be transferred to the Lord President?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 28 November 2023
Karen Adam
Good morning to the panel. I appreciate your answer to the convener’s earlier question, saying that you cannot really speculate on amendments. However, I wonder whether there are—if I can word it like this—any updates on discussions between the Lord President and the Scottish Government regarding any areas in which it may be easier to transfer, through an amendment to the bill, powers to the Lord President from the Scottish Government, where the bill currently proposes that they rest. You said, for example, that it would be tricky to set up an independent regulator. Are there any areas in which you see any hint that what I have described would be possible?
10:15Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 28 November 2023
Karen Adam
Last week, the Association of Construction Attorneys stated that becoming a new regulator under the existing rules was
“challenging and, at times, traumatic”.—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 21 November 2023; c 2.]
It also said that no reasons for decisions were given by the Lord President. Do the rules in sections 25 to 37 of the bill, on applications to become a new regulator, need to be amended in some way to deal with that issue?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 28 November 2023
Karen Adam
Lady Dorrian stated that it would be problematic for the Lord President to have a say over an independent review body. Do you agree?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 November 2023
Karen Adam
I want to drill down a bit more into that, if I may. My question is along the lines of the supplementary that just popped up, but I want to open it up to more of the panel.
What are the panel’s views on the powers being granted to the SLCC to initiate a complaint in its own name when it becomes aware of a public interest issue and on the powers for professional organisations to investigate complaints on their own initiative, where those arise from their regulatory monitoring? I am happy to be guided on who to ask first, convener.