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 3805 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I thank the minister for his evidence today. We will publish a short report to the Parliament, setting out our decision on the instruments.
I suspend the meeting for two minutes to allow our witnesses to leave.
09:06 Meeting suspended.Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
In your submission, you say that
“the costs of remediating dangerous cladding and other defects in and on residential buildings”
should not
“fall on leaseholders, occupiers or taxpayers. This is consistent with the ‘polluter pays’ principle.”
However, the bill intends to raise only around 15 per cent of the cost of remediation, or about £30 million a year. The rest will come from the central capital programme, which obviously—and understandably—means that it cannot be spent on other things. Is the Government pitching this at the right level, or should the levy be higher, or, indeed, lower?
09:15Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Mr Drummond, will that not be very difficult? For argument’s sake, let us say that 10,000 houses have been built that would qualify under the scheme, if and when the scheme is eventually agreed. If there is a £30 million levy, that would amount to £3,000 a house. Is there any way in which the burden is not going to be passed on to house buyers?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Should that have been led by a judge? One might argue for having a judge if there are victims involved, but is it necessary for a bricks-and-mortar inquiry?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I know that this is a hard question, but is there an optimum number of core participants?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
So, some might have only five, and others might have 50.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Do you have any other suggestions? Given your detailed involvement in some very high-profile public inquiries, have there been any areas where you thought, “Do you know what? We could have done that more efficiently, more effectively and more timeously”?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Sure.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I understand what you are saying about that particular issue, but I do not think that he meant to say it with that level of insensitivity. Although it is not said, people still think it—it is still in the background, and there is an element of reality to it.
One of the frustrations is that a Government—whether it be the UK Government, the Scottish Government or whatever—sets up a public inquiry because, frankly, it is politically expedient to do so. It gets the matter off the minister’s desk and kicks it into touch, and the minister will not be in office in five or 10 years, when the inquiry is concluded. Then we get the recommendations, which the Government says it will look at, and another year or two elapses, so there is surely still an element of frustration for the people who have been victims of the wrong that the public inquiry was set up to right. Could there be a situation in which the recommendations would have to be implemented? It would be difficult, because some recommendations might take time and would not be implemented overnight. What should the mechanism be to ensure that the recommendations are implemented rather than just left to the Government?
I recall that the Plotnikov inquiry, which took place about 24 or 25 years ago, made 42 recommendations but, two years after it concluded, only one recommendation had been implemented. After all the evidence that has been given, all the emotion for the people who were the victims, all the money that has been spent and all the time that has elapsed, we get recommendations and then nothing happens. What can we do to enhance the delivery of those recommendations?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 October 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Earlier, Mr Drummond spoke about some of the appalling defects in modern buildings. Although the Scottish Government plans for the tax to have a 15-year lifespan, your submission says that
“the levy can never be retired”,
because there will always be a need for that kind of funding.