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 2076 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
You make a point that reflects my personal experience, which is that a programme plan is only ever accurate after the programme has finished. That is the standard issue and risk for all the spend. What you are describing makes that more likely, rather than less likely. You are talking about the business cases in the areas that you mentioned earlier, but only at that point will we start, from a financial perspective, to get a sense of the risks to the public purse. There are concerns about parliamentary scrutiny, on which I absolutely back up what my colleague, Mr Mason, said.
I looked in the financial memorandum specifically for the word “risk”. It is mentioned only twice. However, this is screaming out that there are huge risks, to me. It might be that you are under pressure in terms of timescales in which to deliver, but from my perspective of financial scrutiny, I am seeing a blank cheque. That is deeply worrying in respect of the public purse.
If you had had a choice, would you have produced that financial memorandum or would you have wanted more detail and further breakdowns based on the policy provisions? Were you pushed to bring forward the financial memorandum?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
Thank you.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
Good morning. I read all your submissions with great interest, and I share your concerns about some of the issues that have already been touched on around VAT, pensions, assets, governance and so on. In the previous evidence session, I added in some of my own concerns. However, in the interests of giving every panel an equally hard time, I want to ask you some questions.
Any change that removes or is perceived to remove responsibilities is always resisted by the affected body. To what extent are you simply resistant to change and protecting your own turf, if you like?
Sarah Watters smiled, so she can go first.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 6 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
The First Minister will have seen the truly shocking findings by the University of Glasgow and the Glasgow Centre for Population Health that were published yesterday in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. They show that 19,299 excess deaths in Scotland are likely to have been caused by United Kingdom Government’s economic policy. The academics also report that that translates into 300,000 deaths across the UK—deaths that lie squarely at the door of the Tories. Does the First Minister therefore agree that it is essential for the protection of our population’s health that Scotland escapes Westminster control and the Tories for good, and that that can be guaranteed only with independence?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
I have the same general observation that I relayed in the earlier session about how scrutiny will be undertaken and how there will be alignment with our priorities—in terms of fair work, conditionality or gender fairness—both proactively and up front and reactively in terms of value for spend and alignment to the national performance framework. That is my first question.
My second question is that it would be helpful for me—and would make your concern live—if you could outline some practical examples of where the fact that the powers are too broad would be a concern in procurement processes.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
To go back to my first point, we covered this in an earlier session, but what was said then will belong in a different record. Will the discussions include any consideration of how procurement and the enactment of this bill will align directly with the national performance framework? I call your attention to the fact that the Finance and Public Administration Committee has asked that the UK Government has cognisance of this, because there are specific measurable outcomes that the Scottish Government will be measured against, even if it is not directly linear—we appreciate the complexity of the budget. Has any consideration been given to that or is that an additional area of concern for you?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
I appreciate what you have outlined about engagement behind the scenes and at official level. Have any discussions taken place in either of those ways about the breadth of powers and about specific examples? Can you give any more colour to that?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
It may be that this question should live with the Public Audit Committee, but have there been any discussions about how moneys that are spent by the UK Infrastructure Bank will be actively scrutinised, audited and aligned with the national performance framework, given that the Scottish Government is responsible for outcomes?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
I highlight the issue because of the suggestions of an MOU and a representative who will consider the proactive, up-front aspirations in various areas. However, I am also thinking about the reactive scrutiny element in relation to value for public money. Those are the two sides to the coin. However, you can come back to us on that.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 October 2022
Michelle Thomson
I suspect that this has already been covered, but is part of your concern about getting this on the record now that, even if the power were to be subsequently changed a year down the road, it establishes a precedent that could be used for other potential disbenefits in similar trade deals, given the GDP figures that you outlined at the start of your statement?