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 778 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Lorna Slater
In previous evidence sessions, we heard from representatives of business and so on that they feel that they have a good understanding of the duties of business as regards reaching net zero, the wellbeing economy, the circular economy and the new kid on the block: being nature positive. However, I am not sure that that is what I have been hearing on the ground. I would love to hear from you guys how well you think Scottish businesses understand their duties in all those spaces, because that is quite a lot for them to take on.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
Thank you. The committee’s role is to look at the potential structures, as opposed to any particular commissioner’s merits, because they will be decided on by the Parliament.
We have discussed how effective committees are in scrutinising SPCB supported bodies—how much time and bandwidth they have to spend with those bodies—but we have mentioned that several SPCB supported bodies do excellent work on really important things that is not fed into the Parliament at all. I am not even sure that we are using the bodies that we have effectively, in either direction. Do you have any thoughts about that?
Parliamentary committees are already having trouble scrutinising the SPCB supported bodies that we have. If there were more bodies, the committees would be spread even thinner. Equally, are you concerned that SPCB supported bodies are not having their fantastic work fed back into the Parliament? Would not the creation of more commissioners just make the level of scrutiny worse and reduce effectiveness?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
Do Sarah Boyack or Jeremy Balfour have any comments?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
Thank you.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
Several of the office-holders from whom we have received evidence have talked about audits. Indeed, the issue has come up frequently, and everyone has said that audits are important and that the scrutiny is both welcome and valuable. However, several office-holders have noted the issue of audit being proportionate, with some saying that they are audited twice a year and others saying that they also have an office or departmental audit, which in the process becomes part of a larger audit. It means that there are audits upon audits.
In previous evidence-taking sessions and written submissions, a discussion has arisen on whether there should be a single audit for all SPCB supported bodies. We understand that that would require legislative changes, but will you elaborate on the potential benefits and challenges of such an approach?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
In that case, there might be room to look at how the process could work in a more streamlined way, so that it is still effective but does not feel quite so burdensome.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
I have a question, convener, but only if there is time for it.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
However, there might be some scope for officers to share internal audit functions and related matters.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
Are you aware of existing examples of shared audit services or functions in the public sector that could serve as a model for SPCB supported bodies, as you discuss in your written submission?
10:00SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Lorna Slater
There is absolutely no doubt about the importance of the topics for the proposed new commissioners, but our discussion is about how we can most effectively represent those interests. Someone might be old, disabled, a victim of crime and neurodivergent, so separating advocacy roles might make it harder for people to get the support that they need, because they might not know where to go.
For the record, I note that the office of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner, which has been held up by you and other witnesses as an example of best practice, predates the Scottish Human Rights Commission and has a substantially different remit under the legislation. In their evidence, the SHRC and the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman described frustrations about the limitations of their roles under the legislation. Instead of creating new commissioners, why do the proposals for improved advocacy not include legislative changes to redefine the roles of existing bodies to give them powers that are more like those of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner?