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 1741 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
Good morning. I confess that I am still trying to get my head around how it all works, so forgive me if I get some things wrong. My first question is about your role in relation to allegations of criminality by police officers. I am familiar with a number of cases that have taken two years or longer. In some cases, officers have been found not guilty and then faced further proceedings from Police Scotland in relation to the conduct aspect of it. It seems grossly unfair, either way, that it takes that length of time. You will find that many organisations will say the same. The police officers are suspended during that period, so Police Scotland does not get the benefit of having those officers until the case is completed. I want to understand the role of the PIRC in relation to, for example, assaults against prisoners, which I think is a more common one. Could you help me to understand that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
If I understand the submission correctly, it says that there should be no change to the current arrangements. Is that correct? It says that
“It would ... be incongruous to suggest that in order to allow proceedings to continue in respect of an officer who resigns or retires in advance of any gross misconduct hearing”,
additional assessment and determination by the PIRC would be required, because that would
“usurp the powers”
of the deputy chief constable. My understanding is that Elish Angiolini does not say anything about that.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
You say that, except in exceptional circumstances, the allegation should be dealt with within 12 months if it is “proportionate” to do so. Is that right?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
Thank you—that is helpful. You say in your submission that the Angiolini report is silent on the question of who should decide whether an allegation amounts to gross misconduct. Under the current regulations, that is done by the deputy chief constable designate. Can you speak to that point?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
You can then make a decision at that point about whether there is sufficiency of evidence, and, if you think that there might be—
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
Right—I understand.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
Thank you. Recommendation 46 of the review is:
“The ability to report directly to the Criminal Allegations Against Police Division of COPFS a complaint of a crime by a police officer should be much better publicised and made more accessible to the public by COPFS”.
I wonder why you thought that that was the case—that a complaint should be widely publicised? Why is that or, rather, what was meant by that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
I understand. That is helpful.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
That is really interesting and helpful, because we thought that there might be a legal reason for that. Now that we know that there is not, we can pursue that.
I want to keep using an example—a simple example. On the face of it, if a police officer is accused of assault, that is a criminal case that may go to court, and the court may find the officer not guilty.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 15 May 2024
Pauline McNeill
The PIRC has said that it is largely meeting those targets but that you can take up to six months.