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 1786 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft] Business until 18:01
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Katy Clark
Scotland is experiencing what is said to be the worst flu death season in more than four decades, and changes to vaccination eligibility, to which the cabinet secretary referred, have meant that an additional half a million people were not offered the flu vaccine. Is the Scottish Government reconsidering eligibility and whether it should be extended to those aged 50 to 64?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 December 2025
Katy Clark
There is a strong economic and social case for a direct award to the yard, and I urge the First Minister to support such an award. A decision on the contract has been delayed for far too long and the workforce deserves clarity, so will the First Minister undertake to ensure that there is a speedy decision? If he cannot commit to a direct award of the contract today, will he commit to supporting Ferguson’s through other avenues, such as the second round of the small vessel replacement programme, and the delivery—in full—of the promised £14.2 million investment?
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
It is really helpful to get your evidence about extended travel time. Can you say more about response times? It is very concerning that there seem to have been considerable increases in response times over recent years. The Fire and Rescue Service would say that there is a health warning with regard to response times: the response time is a statistic that relates to the first appliance arriving, when, sometimes, you need three appliances and the right configuration of firefighters and equipment before you can do what needs to be done. However, how concerned should we be about the significant increases in response times and the prediction that they will continue to increase?
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
We are primarily looking at the service delivery review, but we are also looking at the budget. It is difficult to disentangle some of the issues that are involved with the two. I hear what you are saying about your concern that some of the proposals are primarily driven by a cuts agenda. You have clearly set out the challenge that we have in relation to response times, the number of firefighters and the number of appliances.
However, in committee meetings earlier in the parliamentary session, we heard strong evidence on decontamination. As an employer, the fire service has a duty of care towards its workforce to provide safe systems of work. It seems clear that that has not been happening. I know that you have done a lot of work on decontamination and that the service has relied quite heavily on your work. To what extent has that massive challenge been incorporated in the review? It must surely feed into some of the decisions. It would be interesting to get your perspective on whether the review captures the issue.
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
Some elements of the bill would require further legislation to bring them into effect, including part 1—we have heard your evidence that that part might have unintended consequences and might not fit in well with existing systems. However, other aspects of the bill would not need further legislation.
From sitting on the committee, I know that quite a lot of the legislation that was passed in the previous parliamentary session still has not been implemented—for example, the Parliament focused yesterday on female genital mutilation legislation that has not been implemented. Even if we managed to pass the bill, it might be a long time before work was done on implementation.
Work is going on now on school education. We know that about one third of schools are signed up for the equally safe at school programme, but it looks as though that will mean different things in different parts of the country. I have heard the evidence about the scale of sexism, misogyny and violence in schools and how it has not been dealt with, so we cannot silo it into personal and social education and modern studies classes.
If we were to go ahead with mandatory school education on domestic abuse, would it be helpful to restrict it to domestic abuse alone, or would it need to be framed far more widely to cover sexism, misogyny and violence? We know that violence in schools—in particular against women staff and pupils—is a massive problem, against the backdrop of social media and the influence of the far right. If we were to go down the path of mandatory education, would it be helpful to frame it narrowly?
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
Convener, would it be okay to ask a question about decontamination and the extent to which that is covered in the review?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
Scottish Labour lodged the motion because we believe that there must be accountability, transparency and justice, and we believe that the Scottish Government has been complacent on group-based sexual exploitation and abuse. The individuals, organisations and public bodies that fail to protect children and young people, especially girls, must be held to account for their failings, and we believe that victims and survivors must have confidence in that process.
We need full transparency from the Government, police, local authorities and other relevant bodies about how and why those failings have occurred. Children and young people who are subjected to such appalling abuse and exploitation deserve justice, including a commitment from the Parliament and the Scottish Government that all steps will be taken to ensure that such crimes never happen again.
I welcome the announcement from Police Scotland last week that there will be an audit to identify any child grooming gangs that have been reported to the force since 2013. We know that there are significant problems with child abuse and grooming in Scotland, and the audit will be key in helping to identify patterns, trends or concerns in relation to the demographics of suspects and offenders. It will be vital in helping to build a clearer picture of the scale of such abuse and exploitation across Scotland, and it will contribute to the on-going work of the National Crime Agency’s operation Beaconport, which forms a broader UK law enforcement approach to the issue.
If the audit identifies any potential cases for reinvestigation, that will hopefully lead to convictions for those who have engaged in such crimes. However, members have rightly questioned whether the audit will inspire the confidence and trust of victims. After all, Police Scotland has been accused of failing victims of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse. That is why Scottish Labour believes that independent oversight of the audit is vital if Police Scotland is to have the confidence and trust of victims. Independent oversight is not uncommon or inappropriate in relation to Police Scotland reviews and audits. The Scottish Police Authority already stands—
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
I am glad that the cabinet secretary seems to agree that we should have a police station in Greenock. As she said, one of the concerns that has been raised is about the loss of the custody suite.
More generally, does she agree that it is important that we continue to have custody suites in local areas? Will she use the opportunity of her meeting with Police Scotland to raise that issue and to impress on the organisation the importance of having local custody suites to reduce the time that is spent escorting people when they are taken into custody?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
Yes, I will take an intervention from the convener of the Criminal Justice Committee.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Katy Clark
I disagree with the member on that, but she is absolutely correct to say—as I said—that the Scottish Police Authority already stands as an independent governance body for policing in Scotland. However, having served on the Criminal Justice Committee for more than four years with the member, I still say that there is a need for far greater scrutiny of policing in Scotland. The committee is very aware of that.
The Scottish Government has previously commissioned independent reviews into police complaints, such as those that were undertaken by Lady Elish Angiolini. Police Scotland has also established independent oversight bodies such as the equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights independent review group. We believe that independent oversight of the audit is appropriate and that it would not undermine the operational independence of Police Scotland. We welcome the appointment of Professor Alexis Jay and reiterate our view that that role needs to be independent and have full, unfettered access to all information and records.
Pauline McNeill and Rona Mackay spoke about the audit that was undertaken by Baroness Casey in relation to group-based abuse and exploitation of children and young people in England and Wales. Although we recognise that many of Baroness Casey’s recommendations apply to other parts of the UK, we think it appropriate that the Scottish Government look at that work and provide an update to identify what can be implemented in relation to any recommendations in Scotland.
I understand that the First Minister previously stated that the Scottish Government is doing work on child protection policies and practices through the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. It would be helpful if he could clarify how survivors and other relevant stakeholders are being engaged in that work to ensure that there is no further exploitation of vulnerable children and young people in the future.
Members have rightly highlighted the recent powerful testimony of Taylor, the care-experienced survivor of human trafficking and child abuse, and have talked about many other children. All the bodies that we have spoken about in the debate have, in the past, failed to take the necessary safeguarding and reporting actions. Taylor herself has called on the First Minister to establish an inquiry, and Scottish Labour supports her in that call. We believe that an inquiry is vital if we are to establish why there has been a lack of intervention and investigation into cases such as Taylor’s.
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children has rightly stressed the need for ministerial leadership to establish the true scale of child abuse and exploitation, particularly in relation to group-based abuse. Although we think that the Scottish Government has been slow to call for an inquiry and show leadership on the issue of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse, we believe that the review can help to determine the extent of grooming in Scotland and the remit of any inquiry. That is why we believe that the review is required and we will support the Scottish Government in that work. However, we believe that it is likely that the review will lead to an inquiry.