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 882 contributions
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
Can we get hold of that review paper? That would be really interesting.
I realise that we have not yet heard from Craig Naylor, but John Ireland and Julie Paterson have spoken about the importance of independence, which is something that all the SPCB-supported bodies have emphasised to us. However, to flip that on its head, one of the frustrations that the committee is hearing from SPCB-supported bodies involves a perceived inability to effect change. They produce brilliant papers, research and investigations, but that work does not go anywhere. Although they are accountable to the Parliament, committees or members are not picking up that work and feeding it into the Government. I wonder whether being sponsored by the Government and having direct access to a minister means that the work that you do is taken up and fed into the system more effectively than it would be if you were that further step removed from the Parliament.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
That is helpful.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
I will return to the point around funding. John Ireland spoke a little about that at the start of the meeting, but I want to dig into it a bit more.
We are interested in how funding arrangements are different for SPCB-supported bodies versus Scottish Government bodies. Will you give us a bit more detail about how your budgets are set? Do you set your budget and then it gets signed off by someone? What is the process?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
Do you get pushback on your budget or is the process of approving the budget largely technical?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
Is there pushback on the budgets that you set, or is the process generally a technical one?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 May 2025
Lorna Slater
I will dig in for further details. Do you come under pressure to make efficiency savings, or do you have support to find them and to optimise your budget? Is there a push to do those things? If additional work comes up or an urgent crisis happens, is there a process for applying for more money?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 30 April 2025
Lorna Slater
Does anyone else want to come in on that?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 30 April 2025
Lorna Slater
I hear that Jack Norquoy is looking for projects managers, so I will pop my CV through.
We have been hearing from employers about their frustration with the inflexibility in Scotland’s skills system, particularly in colleges, because college courses are offered only at certain times of the year and colleges cannot keep up with technology. Lothian Buses, for example, uses private training providers because the colleges do not have hydrogen buses for the apprentices to practise on. How can we make our college and university sectors flexible enough to provide the workforce that we desperately need?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 30 April 2025
Lorna Slater
Who funds those? Who pays the student’s wages?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 30 April 2025
Lorna Slater
I am interested in the theme of workplace learning. I am continually surprised and slightly horrified by how far the UK is behind North America on things such co-oping in engineering programmes. I do not know how familiar you are with such things. When I studied engineering at my university—and this was common in universities all over North America—my degree took five years, but it took me seven years to graduate because, for two and half of those years, I worked in industry, paid by industry, and not at the minimum wage but at junior engineering rates. When I graduated, not only had that had some impact on my student loans, but I had two and half years of experience, and I was offered two jobs in my first week in the UK.
The model in North America is that universities partner with industry, which knows that the model exists and gets engineering students for a chunk of time—four months, eight months or a year—so that those students are able to complete an entire project. It is quite common for engineering companies to say, “Brilliant. We need a new thing, so we’ll get some co-op students in the summer to deliver that project for us.” It is a long-term partnership, and it means that we do not have the juggling act of graduate apprentices being here for three days a week and there for three days a week, which makes it difficult to fund lectures and difficult for students to plan their lives and their transport to work—all those ordinary logistics.
In terms of flexibility for institutions, is the North American model being looked at? Should it be, or is it not right for the UK? How do we make the workplace learning better here?