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 1906 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
In preparation for this meeting I thought, “Oh, I’ll have a wee look at the online offering,” and I was staggered to see that there was no January sale. Is it just me?
I get a general sense from talking to you, and from the fact that you are not able to provide the information, that the shop is still not being looked at as a business. I totally appreciate that it is not a business and that you are working under certain constraints, but I wonder about that kind of thinking, because I would expect any or all of you to be across the numbers at any given time.
I come back to a comment that Daniel Johnson made a few years ago—you may recall it, Jackson—when he talked about looking at this issue from his retail background. I get the sense that we are not even at the starting gates here. Am I wrong or being unfair?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
I absolutely agree with your last point, but my point is not about footfall. If you were to focus on an online proposition and were marketing directly to, say, our diaspora in North America and had a proper marketing position, you could absolutely increase turnover.
Anyway, I digress. I want to go back to the office-holders. At some point, this will be a concern for everybody, but when we were considering our report on the commissioners, it became apparent that there was almost an accountability gap between what you are required to do, which is to scrutinise budget propositions, and the Parliament’s overall responsibility with regard to increasing costs.
Earlier, you mentioned that there has been an increase in responsibilities for some office-holders. That happens over here, and then, over there, you look at the implications of that as part of an increased budget request. Do you agree that there is an accountability gap there? It might well be occurring in other areas, too. As we as a committee put together our legacy report, will the SPCB, too, highlight areas where the overall scrutiny and effectiveness of spend should, from your perspective, be revisited?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
That is heartening to hear. I will not be here, but it would be interesting to see how the agreement with the Conveners Group is, ultimately, reflected in the cost of office-holders. I hope that there will be people watching that with interest.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
I have a couple of questions. First, I, too, thank you for the increased detail in the submission. That has been very helpful, and it would be good to see that continue.
On the topic of the shop, you mentioned a review. What exactly is contained in that review? I would also like to understand your strategic intentions for the shop. We recognise that it is loss making. It is, arguably, a hygiene factor. We have also talked about subcontracting services. However, I am just not clear what your intentions are for the shop. Will you tell me more about the review and what the strategy is?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
In your submission, you say that a review of the shop is under way. What is being reviewed? What are the terms of reference for that?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
Actually, I would argue the reverse. If you applied an entrepreneurial mindset to the shop and took on some creative ideas, you could bring more people into the Parliament, because of increased brand awareness. I do not want to go off on one here, but that is sort of what I mean when I say that I have no sense of strategy.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
In terms of turnover, what is the split between visitor-led and online purchases? I noticed that that was not in your figures, and I do not have a sense of what the percentage split of that income is.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 January 2026
Michelle Thomson
From what you have said, should I take it that you are looking, if at all possible, to move it away from being loss making and at least get it to wipe its face?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Michelle Thomson
I am sure that, just as you watched the previous evidence sessions, our previous witnesses will also be watching this session, so I reiterate that clear call to people to provide more information, although they will need to do it quickly because we are up against time, as I understand it. What are your thoughts about the question of tokenisation?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Michelle Thomson
I have a question about tokenisation, which you might have seen come up quite a lot in our discussions. The bill is silent on it, but we know that it is a growing area. I think that the point that we stopped at is that it is not always clear that transferring ownership of a digital token is transferring the underlying asset. What is your thinking about how that issue might be approached, because it is fundamental to the approach to tokenisation in law? Scotland’s place in utilising tokenisation is important, and we are already there. It could bring greater value to the economy and so on.
I appreciate that that is quite a technical question, so if you want to bring in somebody else, I will be quite happy.