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 1537 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
Yes, I am.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
That is fine. Thank you very much.
10:45Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
So, you would say that there is always the possibility of taking forward a more formal complaint.
From your experience of dealing with different complaints, do you think it is fair to say that there can be inconsistencies? With regard to the cases that you have looked at, do you have any concerns about how specific groups in the community experience their interactions with the police? For example, do you think that there is a social class issue? Is there anything that we need to be aware of?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
My question is not really about process; it is about whether you have come to any conclusions? Have you got any concerns? For example, people in more deprived and poorer communities may get a different service from that which, say, a middle-class woman may get. Is that not something that you would consider?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
I appreciate that, but does the process not still sometimes involve local officers to take forward whatever has come out of the complaint process?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
Yes, but that might often require action by the officer to engage with the constituent and the member of the public to resolve whatever the issue is. Is that fair to say?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
So, you do not have any concerns about whether there is an inconsistency thereafter, and that is not something that you have looked at or have views on. Is that right?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
I appreciate that concerns about service are raised by the public in a number of ways, not always as a formal complaint and, as you said, not always with yourself. From casework from my constituents, it appears that there can be an inconsistency in the way that issues are dealt with, and that there are some specialist staff who are dealing with complaints at a more regional level in a way that shows a high level of training and a specialism in dealing with these kinds of matters. However, when it goes back to a local level, the standard sometimes seems different. Would you recognise that as a fair description? Is that something that you have looked at or have views on? How do we get consistency in how issues are dealt with?
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
I press amendment 10.
Amendment 10 agreed to.
Amendment 11 moved—[Katy Clark]—and agreed to.
Amendment 4 moved—[Sharon Dowey]—and agreed to.
Section 3A—Vetting code of practice
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Katy Clark
I will speak to amendment 10 first and to amendment 11 later. I believe that the amendments are fairly straightforward. Their aim is to improve transparency and increase the amount of information that is provided to the Parliament.
Amendment 11, which I will speak to later, requires that, when the chief constable lays a revised code, they are also required to lay a statement before the Parliament that summarises any representations that have been made during the consultation and any representations that have not resulted in a revision to the code. The amendments seek to provide the Parliament with information about the arguments and representations that have been made that relate to the code.
The provision in amendment 11 is slightly different to the wording that I proposed in an amendment at stage 2.
My amendments in the group were submitted after discussion with the Scottish Government, and I thank the officials involved for their assistance in drafting them. I hope that the amendments are now drafted in terms that will enable them to have wide support.
I move amendment 10.