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 553 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Katy Clark
It would be interesting to hear from the cabinet secretary on another occasion whether the Government is doing any work to look at the underlying trends. What information can the cabinet secretary give about the profile of women who are reporting rape—for example, does it tend to be younger women or older women? Have there been changes to that profile in recent years? There have been suggestions that there has been an increase in the number of rape reports from very young women and girls. Does the cabinet secretary understand that to be the case, or is it something that she is looking at?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Katy Clark
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the number of new rape cases being reported to police has increased by more than a third since 2020-21. (S6T-02508)
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Katy Clark
Does the cabinet secretary believe that there has been a rise in the number of rapes in society in recent years, or does she believe that the increase relates to higher levels of reporting, as she mentioned? Is the Scottish Government doing any work to get a better understanding of whether there has been an increase in sexual violence, particularly given some of the challenges that we face?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 April 2025
Katy Clark
As the First Minister knows, Scotland has the highest number of prisoners in western Europe, per head. If we want to reduce prison costs, we must reduce the number of people in custody and the levels of offending. Some people must be kept in custody but, as a country, we spend comparatively little on community justice. Does the First Minister accept that we need to shift resources significantly to robust alternatives to custody, which the evidence suggests are more effective at reducing offending for many prisoners?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 April 2025
Katy Clark
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether the reported increased annual cost of Scotland’s prisons to over £77,000 per prisoner represents good value for public money. (S6F-03996)
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Katy Clark
A constituent of mine has been in touch. She has been in hospital but ready for discharge since 17 November, as North Ayrshire health and social care partnership has been unable to provide a care package.
I am making representations, but what advice does the cabinet secretary have? Does she think that that is the longest that a current patient has been in hospital? What is being done to ensure that we stop such waits happening, given the waste of resource?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Katy Clark
To ask the Scottish Government how many patients in hospital are waiting for a social care package assessment from North Ayrshire health and social care partnership. (S6O-04524)
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
Katy Clark
Does the cabinet secretary agree that we need a cross-campus strategy to address violence and abuse against women and girls in schools and that we need more education to ensure a better understanding of why abuse and violence are unacceptable? What more does she believe can be done to support staff in schools? Given what she just said about criminality, does she agree that there is a role in this for the police and the criminal justice system?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
Katy Clark
I welcome the opportunity to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. We welcome the general principles of the bill, but we have concerns about aspects of the detail, which we hope can be addressed at stage 2.
As the cabinet secretary said, many of the provisions seek to make permanent some of the practices that were brought into effect by the emergency Covid legislation. Some of those practices have been accepted by all as good practice and are uncontroversial, such as the electronic signing and sending of documents. Other practices, such as aspects of virtual attendance, have either not really operated or operated with difficulty—the custody courts are an example of that.
The drafting of some sections has given rise to concerns about overreach. The reliability of technology is another consideration that has been a real concern over recent years, although it is one that I hope will be addressed over time.
As Pauline McNeill outlined, the evidence that the committee was given pointed to substantial additional court time being required due to failures with internet connections. We also know that defence agents, in particular, expressed concern about the difficulty in taking instructions or getting an impression of the client in virtual hearings. That is also a concern for the Crown and for the court.
As members before me have outlined, there are two parts to the bill. Part 1 seeks to allow digital paperwork, witness testimonies and evidence in order to make permanent provisions that were introduced during the Covid pandemic. I appreciate that those proposals represent an effort to streamline and renew the efficiency of the court system in a modern technological landscape.
However, the bill does not outline in detail the criteria on which a determination in favour of virtual attendance in particular categories should be made. I noted the cabinet secretary’s comment on that issue earlier in the debate. We are concerned that the provisions relating to whether there should be virtual attendance or physical attendance need to be clarified. We also believe that the provisions relating to evidential objects being produced in court by the Crown need to be strengthened. We would be looking for more safeguards on some of those aspects at stage 2.
As stakeholders have highlighted to the Criminal Justice Committee, it might often be in the best interests of the court to request witnesses and, indeed, the accused, to attend in person in order to obtain the best evidence. That is particularly the case when, for example, evidence is in dispute. It is also an issue in relation to physical evidence. In such instances, if the court is to request that evidence be given in person, the bill outlines in detail how that test would be applied.
Furthermore, I note that, during pilots for virtual court attendance, there were frequent difficulties with internet access. We welcome the intention behind the bill to make virtual hearings more of a reality, but we do not believe that we have fully heard the detail of what happened with pilots previously, and we believe that there needs to be a great deal more scrutiny of that before we have permanent provisions in law.
We very much welcome the proposed domestic homicide and suicide reviews in part 2 of the bill. Such reviews already exist in England and are being brought into effect in Wales. I was pleased that the convener of the committee spoke about why the reviews should be anonymous and about the risks of retraumatisation, particularly for the family if details of what has happened in a domestic homicide or a suicide become public. We understand that that approach is being taken in Wales, based on lessons learned from what happened in England, where much of the detail is provided to the public.
Liam McArthur spoke about the cluttered landscape of reviews in Scotland and how we must ensure that they do not overlap. The committee considered that issue, and we also believe that it needs to be addressed. I appreciate that these review proposals represent an effort to fill a gap in Scotland’s statutory framework and to reflect on areas for reform and improvement in order to prevent future abuse and deaths. We very much support that intention of the Scottish Government. However, we believe that, as well as looking at the issue of anonymisation, we need to look at the process of full disclosure for victims’ families during the development of those reviews. It is our understanding that the Scottish Government intends for families to be kept closely advised of the available facts.
We believe that the bill must reflect an understanding that there is no universal, blanket approach to the publication of sensitive information but that there needs to be a trauma-informed approach and that we need to learn the lessons of what has happened in other jurisdictions to ensure that Scotland has the best possible process.
16:36Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Katy Clark
A number of my constituents have got in touch with me to raise concerns about sub-audible sound noise pollution caused by wind turbines. Does the Scottish Government plan to issue guidance to local authorities regarding the siting of wind turbines and the potential health issues associated with living in close proximity to turbines?