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 3573 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
There are a number of things in your answer. First, are firms motivated to limit costs? There seems to be no real incentive for them to do so.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
During last summer, autumn and into the winter, you were saying that relationships had improved, so there is, obviously, concern if that is not the case. On 29 March, this committee and our Welsh and Northern Irish counterparts had a meeting with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. It was meant to be an in-person meeting but, a few days beforehand, it was changed to an online meeting of 45 minutes. On the day, that was reduced to 30 minutes and, once he came on the call, it was reduced to less than 15 minutes. There were 11 political parties at the meeting who wanted to engage, and we could not. In fact, his own political party was probably the most critical of that engagement. Is there a wider issue with the UK Treasury or, specifically, with the CST? Obviously, we will have concerns if that is going to be an on-going situation. We do not want relationships to deteriorate as the months and years progress.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
The Scottish child abuse inquiry has already cost more than £95 million and has been going for nine or 10 years. That is clearly a concern.
You have made suggestions on alternatives. People who demand inquiries are often looking for a judge-led inquiry, because they say that that is the gold standard. However, in your evidence, you say that witnesses, when meeting round a small table with a panel to give their evidence,
“either individually or in small groups”,
and when
“lawyers were not involved”,
found that to be
“much less formal and intimidating”
but that it
“nonetheless added considerably to the information the panel were able to take into account.”
Your view is that that is probably a more expeditious, less expensive and—for the people who are giving evidence—less daunting prospect.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
You mention the fact that, in the Jersey inquiry, two solicitors were required to be involved, “at considerable hourly rates”. In the Scottish Covid inquiry, the rate for senior counsel was capped at some £200 an hour, with around 40—but possibly 60—hours a week, which means that, for that individual, the rate could effectively range from £8,000 to £12,000 a week. So far, the Scottish Covid inquiry has cost £34 million and is still on-going; the UK one has cost £164 million. That is a lot of hours for lawyers, is it not?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I believe that the Sheku Bayoh inquiry has, so far, cost £17 million in legal fees alone. That means 85,000 hours for senior counsel—although they are not all senior counsel—even at £200 an hour. Eyebrows have certainly been raised over the costs of those inquiries.
Let us compare with elsewhere. Australia is not greatly different from the UK in many areas, and its Covid inquiry took 13 months and cost £4 million. New Zealand’s inquiry has been on-going for two years but it has cost £7 million so far—so a lot less than Scotland’s. Norway, Sweden and Finland have all concluded their inquiries within a year or so, so there are ways in which the process can be done more efficiently and effectively.
You have talked about an inquisitorial approach, for example. Could there also be a more standardised approach to the practicalities in relation to start-up time and reduced costs? We have already heard that the Caldwell inquiry took some 13 months to be set up after it was announced. That family had to wait day in, day out, wondering when it would happen, for more than a year. We are also aware that more than £1 million has been spent on the Eljamel case before any evidence has even been heard.
11:30Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
When inquiries have completed their deliberations, one area of frustration is that the report can take donkey’s years to write. You said that you tried with your report—which still took a year to write—to make the recommendations “as short as possible” and that there were eight recommendations. Some inquiries have as many as 86 recommendations and some have only one. Are you suggesting that they should try to make recommendations as punchy—for want of a better word—and impactful as possible?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
There is also an issue of conflict of interest when legal firms that are directly involved in a specific inquiry are themselves suggesting a deepening and widening of that inquiry.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you. That will have whetted the appetite of colleagues around the table.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you very much. I really found this opening session of the inquiry fascinating. Would you like to add anything further to the evidence that you have provided today before we wind up, Professor Cameron?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Hold on. Excuse me for a second. We are drifting quite significantly away from the issue on which we are supposed to be taking evidence, Michael.