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 1356 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
I do. As far as I was concerned, the professor had asked for clarity and that should have been resolved at the earliest opportunity, although my understanding remains that Professor Jay agreed to the course of the remedy: that her clarification would be minuted in a record that is publicly available. Those minutes were published on 18 November, and there was an urgent question in the chamber on 19 November, so the information was made very public.
As I have said, however, all the information and all the correspondence should have been made available at an earlier stage.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
I had contacted her about—
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
That is not a position that I would have wished for.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
In terms of—
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
Yes, that is a Government decision. I was talking about when Opposition members lodge amendments to a bill. As a hypothetical example, I might look at an amendment and say, “Well, that’s got nothing to do with this bill—that’s not the bill’s purpose”, but which amendments are accepted for debate, either at stage 2 or at stage 3, is not my decision.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
I can take that back to colleagues to reflect on it. With the greatest respect, I am not going to develop policy or interventions on the hoof in committee, and without engaging with colleagues, in particular with those colleagues who lead on much of this work. I accept that there is always a risk that shared responsibility can mean diluted responsibility, but I do not believe that that is the case in either justice or education. We work closely together; we have distinct roles in all of this, and I am very clear about those roles, as are Ms Gilruth and other colleagues, but we work together on it.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
I do not think that they are contradictory. I do not accept that.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
That would be for ministers—it would not be for me, individually, to make a decision on whether there was a public inquiry in and around grooming gangs. That decision would be of a cross-Government nature.
Under the Inquiries Act 2005, which is the current legislation, there is an obligation on the chair of an inquiry to be mindful of cost—I cannot remember the exact wording, but there are some obligations put on the chair in that regard.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
I am respectful of your position, Mr Briggs, although I point out that I am not a regional MSP; I am the MSP for Almond Valley—a constituency MSP.
I genuinely looked at the professor’s letter, which said that the quote was accurate and that she wanted clarification. Clearly, I wanted the matter addressed, but not to my satisfaction; I wanted it addressed to the professor’s satisfaction.
Officials liaised with the professor and discussed with her the course of action that she wanted to take. I was content with that. Under no circumstances was that a process that I was going to interfere with.
The minutes of that important strategic group are very public. Clearly, they are scrutinised and read—as they should be.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 December 2025
Angela Constance
Throughout the bill process, there was extensive engagement with victims and victim support organisations. In fact, many of the reforms in the bill were the result of campaigns and endeavours by very brave victims who were able to speak about their experience publicly. Many victims and victim organisations campaigned for changes such as the abolition of the not proven verdict, the sexual offences court, independent legal representation as part of the court process, and the protection of victims of sexual offences from inappropriate or intrusive questions about their personal history—that is, the section 274 and 275 framework.
As you would expect, and as should be the norm, there was extensive engagement with members of Opposition parties. I endeavoured to build as much consensus as possible around the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, and it grieved me that Parliament was not unanimous on that bill. I had taken out some of the more controversial aspects of the bill with the intention—or hope—of building consensus.
The Government supported 20 Conservative amendments, 14 Liberal Democrat amendments, five Labour amendments and four Green amendments at stages 2 and 3, so there were extensive efforts in that regard. I am grateful to members for those amendments, and in particular to Jamie Greene for his amendments. Where amendments were not taken forward—again, I use Jamie Greene’s amendments as an example—they fed into, for example, the consultation on parole.