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 1811 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 21 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
There is always another one. Thank you for that.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 21 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
Would it help if there was an explanation of the sort of grounds that would lead to a postponement? Would it be helpful from your point of view if there was a clarification of the test that the Presiding Officer had to apply?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 21 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
I will pose a problem with the pilots. If the board is added as an initiator, it might be challenging for regions to say no to the board.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 21 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
It is always on election day that it happens.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 21 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
That is very helpful.
It seems that the committee has finished its questioning. I remind our witnesses that, once they have had an opportunity to consider their evidence, the offer is there if they would like to write to us, particularly on the one matter that we have raised, in which case we look forward to receiving that further information.
I thank our witnesses for their attendance and their contributions, both beforehand, in the call for evidence, and during this meeting.
10:34 Meeting continued in private until 11:04.Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 20 March 2024
Martin Whitfield
I thank the committee and the convener for allowing me to make this statement. It will be very short.
With the greatest respect, I suggest that a lot of the discussion is mixing two elements. One is whether the survivors who lodged the petition can enter the redress scheme. The second is whether, if they do enter the redress scheme, they can produce the evidence that is required. I think it would be helpful to separate those things.
I understand, from the Deputy First Minister’s answer to Foysol Choudhury, that it sits within her power to change the regulations and allow entry to the redress scheme. As, I think, Oliver Mundell pointed out, once the petitioners were in the redress scheme, it would be for the evidence to be balanced.
The First Minister gave the figure of 79 per cent for all those across Scotland who were in agreement with the remit of the redress scheme. Does the Deputy First Minister think that, if the people of Scotland understood this petition in the way that this committee does and in the way that the people who have attended today do, those 79 per cent would say they do not deserve redress?
10:30Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 29 February 2024
Martin Whitfield
Again, I am conscious of the time. I call Stephen Kerr—I highlight the time, I am afraid.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 29 February 2024
Martin Whitfield
Agenda item 2 is our first evidence session on committee effectiveness. The purpose of today’s evidence session is to get reflections from former conveners on the effect of committee structures, the balance of work and making space for innovation for committee effectiveness.
We are joined by Johann Lamont, who was an MSP from 1999 through to 2021, covering sessions 1 to 5—I think that you were convener of four committees over that time—and Professor Adam Tomkins, who was an MSP between 2016 and 2021 and who convened the Justice Committee. Good morning to both of you. I hand over to you for a five-minute introduction, to give your initial thoughts on committee effectiveness.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 29 February 2024
Martin Whitfield
Thank you. Your timing was perfect.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 29 February 2024
Martin Whitfield
Those introductions are incredibly helpful. I hear what you say and the concerns that you have about the legislative process, but I suggest that we park that issue—although other members will perhaps look at it. I know that it is sometimes a challenge to not deal with some of the problems that witnesses throw up, but we want to concentrate on the effectiveness of committees.
09:45Before I throw you to the wolves of the committee on various questions for 10 minutes each or so, I will pick your brains about committee numbers. It is interesting to look back on the previous sessions. We had 26 committees in the first session; 27, excluding ad hoc committees, in the second; 23 in the third; 27 in the fourth; and 29 in the fifth. In this session, we have 17, and the workload of that smaller number of committees falls on a smaller group of back benchers, because—this is not a political point—there is an increasingly large number of members of the Government. It would be helpful to explore your views on that.
Is there a perfect number of committees? I presume that the answer is no. Is there something about committee numbers that either prevents or promotes the effectiveness of committees?
The number of members of committees is also an important issue, and that is something that changes from session to session. This session, we have some large committees and some small committees, whereas, in previous sessions, there were odd numbers of committee members drawn from a narrower range.
Johann, I invite you to comment first, because of your experience of a number of different types of committee. Is the effectiveness of a committee directly affected by the size of a committee and by the amount of work that it is expected to pick up?