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 1800 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
The advice that I had was that it was sufficiently clear. However, I am open to amendments. The provision is a technical amendment, so if the view is that it is not sufficiently belt and braces, there is scope to amend it. We are very amenable to discussions.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
I will bring in Carole Ewart on that, because she has done a huge amount of work on the issue.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
I think that the Scottish Information Commissioner gave some real examples in relation to that last week. The intention is to ensure that the person who seeks the information gets the information that they are entitled to. The amendment to the 2002 act would enable the Scottish Information Commissioner to assist in that process, so an exemption is appropriate in order to enable the legislation’s intentions to be delivered. The Information Commissioner spoke about real examples last week.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
As was outlined in last week’s evidence, we must give power to the Information Commissioner. All the evidence seems to suggest that their having power acts as a deterrent and ensures that bodies comply with their requirements. In effect, that is a way of policing the bill’s implementation.
The provision that you have just raised, the offences under the 2002 act and the new offence that the bill proposes are in place not because we believe that they would be used regularly—we hope that they would never be used—but as a deterrent and to give power to the Information Commissioner.
I know that the commissioner gave a specific example last week of using his powers to ensure that there was compliance before having to take formal steps. There was another example of that in the newspapers this week. I hope that, although the bill would give the Information Commissioner powers, that does not mean that they would have to be used. However, those powers would ensure that public bodies complied with reasonable and lawful requests that were being made.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
Last week was the first time that we have had a detailed response from the Scottish Government, so we have not really been able to take its views into account before. There has been a consensus that, because the power has never been used, it should be removed, and that, with regard to public trust, it is inconsistent to have that power in place. At the end of the day, those matters are political, but proposals have been made over many years that the power should be taken away because it is not needed.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
Exactly. The hope is that the provision would not be used, but there might be extreme cases in which the Information Commissioner felt that it was in the public interest for the matter to be taken forward.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Katy Clark
If it is okay, I will bring in Carole Ewart.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 November 2025
Katy Clark
Yes, of course.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 November 2025
Katy Clark
My question is about fire services. I hope that the cabinet secretary is making strong representations on that aspect of the budget. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has advised that its total capital requirement to 2030-31 is £354 million and that, if its annual budget were to remain at £47 million over that period, there would be a gap of £119 million. The cabinet secretary will be well aware of the poor condition of much of the fire service’s estate and, indeed, the inadequate decontamination facilities that are available for many firefighters. Therefore, is it acceptable for there to be such a shortfall?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 November 2025
Katy Clark
As you say, Ash, there seems to be support for three pillars of your bill from what I will refer to as both sides of the argument. However, there seem to be quite conflicting views on the fourth pillar, which is the principle of criminalising the purchase of sex.
One of the arguments seems to be that criminalising purchasers might have the unintended consequence of placing people who continue to sell sex at greater risk. A specific issue that has been raised is that it would be difficult for checks to take place with potential clients, and the legislation is likely to lead to there being less time to carry out such checks. What is your response to that? Is there any validity in that argument?