Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 2148 contributions
|
Meeting of the Parliament
Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
I will draw the debate to a close by thanking all the members for their views today. Of course, I will consider carefully everything that has been said in the debate.
Once again, I thank the committee that has considered the bill, and I thank all those who provided and gave evidence at stage 1 for their careful consideration and views. It is fair to say today that there has been a wide-ranging debate, and the different views and opinions among members have been very well expressed.
Esther Roberton said in her report:
“I believe that professional bodies providing both regulatory and representative functions can lead to the perception that the two roles are in conflict. It is this perception that risks compromising public trust.”
Legal regulators view that there is no genuinely true conflict of interest, nor any risk of the perception of one, once one properly understands the regulatory process. However, perception has a powerful influence over opinion, and the approach that is outlined in the bill will do much to deliver the priorities of maintaining the independence of the legal profession and strengthening the regulatory duty to work in the public interest. I want to ensure that the bill strikes the right balance between the various interests.
It will be to everyone’s benefit if greater trust can be developed in the integrity of the regulatory framework for those providing legal services. The bill seeks to address concerns from consumer groups that legal regulation does not offer sufficient accountability to protect the public and consumer interests by improving the transparency and accountability of legal services regulations in Scotland.
I have a few things to address in reflection of today’s debate. A few members have reflected on how we got here today. This issue has a history in Parliament of nearly 10 years. Many members have not been here for the entirety of that time and are quite new to the Parliament, so it is important to give a bit of context and history.
Back in 2015, there were calls for reform from stakeholders. The Law Society of Scotland set out reform proposals, as did the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. The Scottish Government then established an independent review to develop views on potential reforms, which was carried out by an independent panel led by Esther Roberton. “Fit for the Future: Report of the Independent Review of Legal Services Regulation in Scotland” was published in October 2018 and made 40 recommendations. Its primary recommendation was that
“There should be a single independent regulator for all providers of legal services in Scotland”.
In June 2019, the Scottish Government published its response to the Roberton report. The Government’s analysis established that, although many of the report’s recommendations were widely supported, views from the legal and consumer landscape on the primary recommendation that there should be an independent regulator were very polarised.
As a result, the Scottish Government made a commitment to hold a public consultation based on the Roberton report’s recommendations, with the intention of seeking to build consensus on the way forward for the much-needed reform. The Scottish Government worked collaboratively with stakeholders from the legal and consumer perspectives to design the consultation. In seeking to build agreement around the proposals for reform, the consultation contained two alternative, viable models of regulation in addition to the Roberton report’s primary recommendation.
The analysis of the consultation showed that views were evenly split between support for and opposition to an independent regulator. However, in many other areas there was broad agreement. The analysis highlighted that all respondents, regardless of affiliation, shared a common aspiration for any future model to be transparent, open to public scrutiny and efficient to ensure that justice remains accessible to all. The bill will allow a proportionate approach that seeks to balance and deliver the key priorities of the stakeholders and the much-needed reform.
I appreciate Jeremy Balfour’s comments about the engagement prior to the bill being published. I assure him that I am keen to engage with all members and stakeholders. I am happy to look into the possibility of the DPLR Committee being involved in an evidence session when the stage 2 amendments are lodged.
Meeting of the Parliament
Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
I know that some of the provisions in the bill have led to differing views, including within the committee, and it is that balance that the Parliament needs to consider if we are to deliver the significant improvements to the regulation of legal services that are really needed.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
I have not had any meetings with the UK Government but, since November, I have had many meetings with stakeholders and weekly meetings with Jim Wilson, who has kept me updated on all progress.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
It was none of the things that you suggest. As I said, this has been on-going for several months and I have been engaging significantly with all stakeholders regarding it. It came into place, I think, over the Christmas period, when we saw, largely on social media, instances of XL bully dogs being brought up to Scotland and the UK Government could not confirm whether that would be illegal.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
Yes. We wanted to bring in the legislation at pace due to XL bully dogs being brought up from England and Wales.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
I will address that but will first clarify a matter in relation to a previous comment. When the legislation was brought in on 1 February in England and Wales, one unintended consequences was that they did not know what to do with a dog if its owner died, which Jim Wilson just mentioned. We are looking at a timescale that is a little bit longer, so that we can cover all the unintended consequences in the second SSI. The UK Government is now adding such provisions, in hindsight, because its legislation was rushed through.
We are engaging with stakeholders about the issues, including the one that you raised about puppies, so that they can be considered for the future instrument.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
Yes.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
The definition is on the UK Government website, which we are following.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
Yes.
Criminal Justice Committee
Subordinate Legislation
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Siobhian Brown
Yes. You are correct, Mr Swinney. I will bring in Jim Wilson, who has been involved in conversations with the DEFRA group that has been set up.
Ever since this was announced—from day 1—we have been trying to establish the consequences for Scotland of the UK legislation coming into force in England and Wales. I did write again to ask formally. You are correct that we did not get a response until 14 December. It was very unclear and vague.
