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 1838 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 27 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
Thank you, convener. My area of interest is probably wider than that, and I am struck by how much work is going on. From what I have heard this morning, we have a great deal of evidence and lived experience, and we have heard a lot about the causes or what needs to be done. I am clear about the role of diversion, which all the papers talk about, and about the role of consumption rooms, which Peter Krykant has been running and which we have debated in the Parliament. It would be helpful to get some guidance from Neil Richardson and Peter Krykant about what they think legislators could prioritise. There are so many frameworks and organisations, so I would like to focus on the top two or three things that legislators need to do in order to build on the work that has been done and tackle the horrendous situation of Scotland having the highest number of drug deaths.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 27 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
I will interrupt you there, if you do not mind, because that is the problem that I am struggling with. I commend you on the work that the task force has done—I did not know about any of it until I read the papers. However, it needs to be boiled down for us as legislators. We have a task force, frameworks and joined-up working. As a legislator, I need to focus and to boil it down in ordinary terms to the two or three things that need to be actioned. That is what I am driving at.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 27 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
Thanks—that is helpful.
Peter Krykant said in his opening statement that he was not a drug user when he was 16 and in care. The Transform Drug Policy Foundation submission states that 13 per cent of people in prison were not drug users before they went to prison. There is quite a big theme about people ending up taking drugs because they are in prison or in care or whatever. Mr Krykant, what else should we be doing to prevent that? What should the Parliament’s priority be in building a wider strategy that will make a difference on Scotland’s drug deaths, which I suppose is what Neil Richardson has talked about?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 7 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
I am in absolutely no doubt that establishing the CPG would give an invaluable platform to people who have felt that they have had no connection through which to influence decision makers. That is why it is important for us to formalise our work. I think that there will be a great deal of interest in the CPG, and I hope that we can work constructively with the medical profession and the Government to produce something over the next few years.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 7 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
Good morning, convener. I thank the committee’s clerk, Sam Currie, for the support that she is giving us as we try to set up the group. I hope that the committee will be satisfied with the proposal.
The proposed CPG is probably the first group of its kind that does not overlap with anything else. We have already done quite a bit of work. Having run informal meetings with an amazing group of people who believe that there are credible health benefits to the use of cannabis, I thought that there would be interest in a formal cross-party group.
The group seeks to understand better the benefits of medicinal cannabis and to recognise case studies that indicate its positive impact on patients who suffer from a variety of conditions. It also seeks to support patients’ rights to access the medicine.
The committee might be familiar with some high-profile cases, such as that of young Cole, who cannot get access to prescribed Bedrolite on the national health service and whose family has to pay for it privately. Taking that medicine has led to an incredible reduction in Cole’s convulsions. In fact, he has hardly had any episodes since he began taking it.
For some patients, medicinal cannabis is absolutely life changing. We have heard informal evidence from people who speak to the fact that some serious health conditions have simply been cleared up by the use of certain types of cannabis product. Therefore, it is in the public interest that we examine the evidence-based research and seek to investigate case studies for people with chronic illnesses who would benefit from medicinal cannabis.
The topics that we anticipate discussing include: access to Bedrolite and other cannabis-based drugs that have a high cost to bring into the country, which is more difficult because of Brexit; a card, known as med can, that the state of Colorado in the US provides for medical cannabis users to show that their use is for health needs; and the human right of patients to access medicinal cannabis versus the public health issue. I feel strongly that, if patients feel that it is beneficial to them, they should not be prevented from using a cannabis product—of which there are many—because of any laws against or judgments about people using such products.
Members might ask why I set up the group. My father, who had severe arthritis, used to ask me whether, if we ever legalised cannabis, I would be the first person to get him some so that he could alleviate his pain and suffering. He believed that it would have done so but, being a law-abiding person, he sadly passed five years ago without getting the chance to find out.
Many people believe that medicinal cannabis will alleviate conditions such as arthritis. That is what drove me to do the work to reduce stigma using the evidence base and working with the national health service. We have a good relationship with the NHS. There is some political resistance to the work, but there is also some interest in it.
We also want to explore whether there should be legislation on cannabis growers. Committee members have probably noticed that a lot more people take cannabis tablets or other cannabis products for health reasons. It is becoming big business and we want to ensure that it is not something that only big business can control. That is why we are interested in cannabis growing.
Those are our main purposes. Rona Mackay has agreed to co-convene the group. Miles Briggs, who has done a huge amount of work on the matter as well, and Oliver Mundell are our Conservative members. Monica Lennon, who has been part of the informal group, Paul Sweeney and Pam Duncan-Glancy have also signed up already. Our members include a number of individuals—they are mentioned in your papers—and organisations, such as the Scottish patient subgroup of Patient-Led Engagement for Access, the Scottish cannabis consortium and the Multiple Sclerosis Society Scotland. I expect a lot more interest if the committee approves our application.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 7 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
Yes. We will have to use international examples, and examples that are perhaps anecdotal but which are nevertheless compelling. The chief medical officer and the chief pharmaceutical officer have addressed us, and there has been some agreement on the need for proper trials. Although it is legal just now for general practitioners to prescribe certain cannabis products, they might not have the confidence to do so. Trials are therefore really important, and we want to ensure that we are pushing at that door, which is partly open, I feel. I think that there is a lot of interest in the issue, but, as you would expect, any Government or medical system wants things to be tried and tested.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 7 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
Thank you very much.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
No, my question is on something else.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
That was a really helpful answer.
I have a very quick question, the answer to which will, I hope, be short. You will have heard—I think that you agree, although you can correct me if not—that fixing the early plea aspect of the fees structure might be helpful. Could you put your views on that on the record? Until we find alternatives and discuss and agree on some of what you have mentioned, should there be, in the short term, an immediate uplift in fees, in addition to what has happened, in order to ensure that we continue to provide an adequate service overall for people who seek to be defended in the criminal justice system?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 October 2021
Pauline McNeill
This question is probably about the capital budget, but the witnesses can tell me if that is right. It is perhaps for Mr Brown—but, again, you can tell me.
The Scottish Police Federation gave evidence about the co-location of police services. Its concern is about the condition of the police estate, and I am sure that it is a fair concern. It is saying that in such cases, Police Scotland has been
“the tenant and not the landlord”
and that there would be increased revenue pressure in the long run if there was more co-location of services. The SPF says:
“This tends to suggest that desperation, rather than suitability is the key driver.”
Is it a principle of the SPA or Police Scotland to seek co-location, or is it a measure of last resort? Obviously, there is an immediate pressure, but, looking to the future, I would not have thought that it would be ideal to co-locate when you are sharing a building with completely different services. That is my concern—I have been controversial in the past, I have to say.
11:15