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 1690 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
I will start with a question for the two directors of finance—Anthony Daye and Nick Kenton. You may have seen that, in the previous panel session, I wanted to explore the extent to which people are confident about their projections for next year’s budget, given the considerable uncertainty, what had been looked at in scenario planning, and their confidence level around that. Please keep your answers brief. I do not need to go through every single budget line; I simply want to get a sense of where you are at with that.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
Yes, it does—thank you.
I appreciate that Malcolm Roughead, given his role, might want to take it up a level. Please give me a sense of your current budget position, your future projections and your confidence level.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
That is very helpful. Thank you.
I want to bring in Jane Morrison-Ross and Carroll Buxton. Nick Kenton used a term “golden threads”. One of my golden threads to obtain diversity in our economic output is ensuring that women-led businesses are adequately represented. There has been a lot of chat. We know that women have been disproportionately affected, and I suspect that women-led businesses have been disproportionately affected. I would like Jane Morrison-Ross’s and Carroll Buxton’s observations on that.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
Thank you. Malcolm Roughead, would you like to come in at this point?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
First, I will take us back a bit and explore budget positions. You have submitted written information, so I want to keep this snappy. I am interested in getting a brief summary of what both organisations believe their current budget positions to be. It might be more appropriate for Douglas Colquhoun to comment on behalf of Scottish Enterprise. You will be looking at next year in the light of a very uncertain trading environment for everybody. I am particularly interested in the forward-looking aspect, the mitigations that you are anticipating and your confidence in them, given the uncertainty about Scottish Government funding.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
If you do not get what your projections are, do you have mitigations in place?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
Okay. You have given a lot of very clear data—thank you for that. I want to establish what your confidence level is for your future projections in the light of an uncertain settlement. How confident are you that you have got all your bases covered?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
I appreciate that it is very complex for you.
I am conscious of time, so I will move on. My next questions are for both organisations, although I suggest that Adrian Gillespie might want to come in for Scottish Enterprise. We had quite alarming stats presented to us from Women’s Enterprise Scotland, and I have a couple of questions off the back of that. The first one is incidental and a result of my also sitting on the Finance and Public Administration Committee. I was quite shocked to hear that only 1 per cent of private equity investment goes on women-led businesses, meaning that, obviously, 99 per cent goes on male-led businesses.
Adrian Gillespie and Malcolm Roughead, do you routinely disaggregate your data by gender, and do you therefore interrogate that data to map out what your territory looks like in business support or business investment?
On the back of that, we have had commentary that the ability of women-owned businesses to access enterprise agency support has been harder because they tend to operate in areas—the beauty sector, for example—that are not necessarily the focus for growth. I would like a bit of commentary on that.
Do you routinely disaggregate data? If so, do you then interrogate it? Adrian Gillespie, perhaps you would like to go first.
10:30Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 14 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
Susan Murray will not be surprised to hear that I want to follow up on her comment about unregistered businesses. It was a fair comment. My perception is that a fair percentage of those businesses would be led by women. Can you put a bit of meat on the bones of the comment that you made on that, before I move on to my main questions?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 14 September 2021
Michelle Thomson
I will bring in David Eiser shortly, but I first want to bring out Susan Murray’s important point about what we can do. Although I recognise and agree with the point about the role of private businesses, perhaps the Government can use conditionality. People are talking about that much more frequently, often in relation to net zero, but it could be used much more. We have business organisations that do not even routinely disaggregate their data by gender and then interrogate that, which seems to me to be utterly fundamental.
Both of the other witnesses can come back in after I have given David Eiser a chance to comment, but my point is that it is incumbent on us to try to assist with potential policy options or ideas. Like Susan Murray, I like to keep things simple, so for me it is about what the difference would be that makes a difference, while recognising the huge complexity. David, do you have any thoughts to add on this area?