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 984 contributions
|
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Delivering Scottish Social Security
Meeting date: 30 November 2023
Katy Clark
The paper in which you reflect on your experiences is really helpful. You refer to Westminster’s
“less than glorious track record”
on social security benefits. It is fair to say that many of us have quite high expectations of what might be possible in Scotland. Indeed, in your paper, you talk about those
“high expectations bumping up against”
implicit and explicit constraints.
I am somebody who looks at outcomes. One of the surprises to me is, despite what the cabinet secretary said earlier, the frustration and experience of many claimants, who do not feel that the outcomes are much different from before. They still have to wait lengthy periods for benefits and, sometimes, those benefits are not granted.
There are two categories, I suppose. There is the creation of new benefits such as the Scottish child payment, and there is the migration of existing benefits. In relation to the latter, what are the lessons from our experiences so far about how we do that better—we do not want to just mirror what comes from down south—and how do we speed up the process to get to a better outcome? I know that a lot of that is about money, but perhaps we can put money to one side and focus on the aspects that are not about money.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 30 November 2023
Katy Clark
Perhaps it is not helpful to get into the current benefits. To a large extent, you have simply mirrored what is happening down south, which many of us hoped would not be the position. Our hope was that we would be doing something better. However, let us not get into that discussion. Let us focus on whether the employment injuries benefit is fit for purpose
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
No. We can think about that issue later. That is helpful.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
No. The composition of the council is a wide issue, but I fully understand the points that Linda is making.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
My question is for Linda Somerville and is about the composition of the council. The STUC submission suggests that 50 per cent of the body should be trade union representatives. I appreciate that different unions operate in different sectors and will have knowledge of different occupations, but I ask Linda to explain why 50 per cent is the right level and say a bit more about what the overall composition of the body should be. We understand that the United Kingdom body is dominated by people from scientific and academic backgrounds.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
My question picks up on some of the evidence that we have already heard. We know that the United Kingdom body is already considering many of the issues discussed. Covid has been mentioned by Norman Provan more than once, and long Covid has been discussed, too. There are obviously significant issues around cancer and other conditions that relate to firefighters, and the issue of women’s occupational health has been strongly emphasised in this evidence session.
It is a concern that, if the proposed council is a scientific body—a committee or body made up of academics—it would simply be duplicating work that is currently carried out by IIAC, without producing different outcomes. We are trying to understand what the added value of the new body might be if it is considering the same issues. Noting what you have said already, do you believe that there would be different outcomes if the composition of the body was different? Are you suggesting that the evidence that would be considered would not be purely scientific, and that there would be other evidence?
I invite Linda Somerville to respond first, as she is representing the STUC.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
No.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
I am asking how we can avoid duplication with the work that is going on at a UK level and how we ensure that there is added value. You have covered a lot of that already, but the committee is concerned, in particular, about how we avoid duplication.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
I will ask about how we apply knowledge and the test that SEIAC would apply. There has been mention of reasonable certainty and the double-risk test. How should the test that the council would apply be developed? Would the council itself do that? Does the Parliament need to set it in legislation? Considering other European models, how do you suggest that Scotland approaches developing that test? You might recommend a test or the process by which one might be developed.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council Bill: Stage 1
Meeting date: 23 November 2023
Katy Clark
The bill suggests a council of 12 members. Is that the right size? Has anyone given that any thought? That might be something that the STUC has considered, given that it made a submission about the number of trade union representatives who should be involved.
