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 1894 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
You anticipated my next question. Do you welcome your level of flexibility or, as an explainer, is the 10 or 5 per cent rule much easier for people to understand, even though they may not agree with it?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
That is fine—very sensible. I am coming to the end of my questions—I hope that you will be disappointed to learn that, but I fear that you will not.
The regional rules are much more explicit than the constituency rules. They are far easier to understand, because we have to group entire constituencies into the regions. Sue Webber prompted a discussion earlier about the challenge that then comes for local authorities, where part of a local authority area is in one region and the rest of it is in another region. That adds to my previous point about one MSP representing a constituency in three different local authority areas, because we could have up to 15 other MSPs interested in an issue. From a purely administrative, common-sense point of view, that is a very big round table to bring together to discuss problems—let me put it that way.
Do you have any comments on the consequences of the choices that are made by Boundaries Scotland? The effect on local authorities is not part of your tests—you need not take account of that if you follow the four rules—but are you conscious of that effect and do you have any concerns about it?
14:00Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
Here is a strange question that I do not know the answer to. When you are considering that, do you think only of the constituency MSP, or does the availability of list MSPs—even though they have not been identified at the point—feed into the “inconveniences” category?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
So they were separate decisions rather than what people perceived, which was that, because the South Scotland numbers were low, you needed something to go in it to get the numbers up—or, indeed, the other way around.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
I will ask my final questions. You are undertaking a lessons learned exercise, which will fill a huge amount of your time. In that exercise, will you consider how to preserve the institutional memory of the challenges that have happened? To put it politely, I think that the institutional memory from the earlier boundary changes was possibly lost. I am not saying that it was a whole new learning curve—absolutely not, because I know that huge amounts of work went into the process. However, the question is how you capture and preserve the lessons learned so that, next time, the process runs even more smoothly and successfully, with a better understanding from the electorate of what is happening.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
The digitised boundaries that fit in—absolutely.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
Putting automaticity to one side, would you like to see anything change before the next go around this circle, particularly with regard to the Holyrood boundaries? Given that we have eight years—who knows—what would your wish list be?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
I thank you very much for coming in and giving evidence; we will now move into private to consider it. Thank you for sharing so fully the journey of the current boundary reviews, which I hope that we are coming to the end of.
14:12 Meeting continued in private until 14:25.Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
I want to look into what should and should not be in the legislation and the suggestion that it should be iterative. The Government is content for the process to sit in primary legislation. The suggestion in the Government’s memorandum is that there should be provision to extend the occasions when it may be triggered and that we should leave an opportunity open for that to appear, presumably through secondary legislation. Is that correct?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2025
Martin Whitfield
I move on to a challenge that we have heard a lot about, which concerns the parity between the routes of being elected regionally and being elected as a constituency MSP. Graham Simpson has said from the outset that, under his bill, there should be parity between all MSPs, because there is parity when we come into this place and take our seats in the chamber, irrespective of how we arrived there. What is the Scottish Government’s view on that? MSPs are all the same when we are sitting in the chamber, but does parity also relate to the journey that we took to get here, via the regional list or the constituency list? Can we say that there absolutely is parity in the chamber but that there is no parity for the purposes of how we travel here—which there is not?