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 1648 contributions
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
I just want to shift the focus a little bit. There are three top-line needs in the public sector equality duty: the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation; the need to advance equality; and the need to foster good relations. We have heard over the past couple of weeks and in written submissions that people tend to focus on the first—elimination of discrimination—with advancing equality and fostering good relations being kind of lesser cousins. Do you agree that that is how people are operating the PSED, whether or not that is the idea behind it?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Is there something about understanding, measuring or defining “fostering good relations”? My second question, on the back of your initial response, is to ask whether work needs to be supported between the EHRC and the Scottish Human Rights Commission in order to get connections between that need, as it is set out in the PSED, and the human rights obligations, with which the SHRC would have more direct engagement? Is that even on the horizon, as far as you are aware?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Good morning to you and your officials, minister, and thank you for your comments. I am interested in a couple of things that you said in your opening remarks and in response to Karen Adam’s questions about consistency. One of the challenges is that some groups and individuals might rely quite heavily on the PSED to deliver positive outcomes for them, and we are not necessarily seeing consistent outcomes through the processes. What is the main reason for some of the challenges or the failures to deliver positive outcomes? We have heard quite a lot about the focus being on process rather than outcomes. Why have we not seen the shift to outcomes for individuals and for people with protected characteristics?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 18 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
I hear that, and your commitment to this is very clear. You have just mentioned the value of leadership. One of the EHRC witnesses in the previous session, when commenting on the consistency of compliance—particularly with the first of the needs covered in the PSED—said that it depends on the seniority of the person completing the report and on how data is gathered.
I do not want to get into data gathering and that kind of thing, but how do we ensure that we get leadership from the top of all the public bodies on the requirement to comply with the PSED and that it is not just left to one person to try to pull everything together? How do you see your interventions driving that leadership through organisations?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Thanks, Rohini. Pauline, you were nodding.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
You talked about the lack of connection to the whole purpose of the duty, which is to drive change, and you mentioned resourcing and competence. Do you think that those are the two issues that are working together to create that disconnect, or are there other things going on as well?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Pauline, do you want to come in?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Thank you. Those specific suggestions on new duties are really helpful.
Lindsey Millen talked earlier about significant failures even to meet basic duties across different groups. Clearly, Close the Gap’s view is that something is missing, and that the public sector equality duty is not delivering outcomes. Is it your view, too, that the PSED cannot deliver the outcomes? Is it only an implementation issue, or is it bigger than that?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Okay. Thanks, Lindsey. Jill Wood, I ask you the same question about fostering good relations.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 11 March 2025
Maggie Chapman
Good morning. Thank you for joining us and for your comments so far.
The difference between the presentations that you are giving us and what we heard last week is quite stark. To an extent, that is one of the reasons why we are undertaking this inquiry. Without the opportunities that we were hoping for during the human rights bill discussions, the PSED is something that we can focus on. We can look at where the duties are not being met.
I was interested in what Clare Gallagher said in her answer to Karen Adam’s question. We are failing on the intersectional aspects and we are failing to understand the complexities of the duties. Do you see that failure as being because the focus is on the process rather than on the outcome? Does that need to be addressed in the reforms? Others around the table will explore the reforms in more detail later, but is the reason for failure that distinction between process and outcomes?
09:45