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 3656 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
I think that Mr Golden was pointing out that we are a very masculine committee, which perhaps might mean that we are not giving due consideration, as others might, to some of the issues that are being raised here.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
I understand the reasons that Mr Torrance gave but, at the same time, I think that Mr Golden makes a perfectly reasonable point. We will keep the petition open and write, as suggested, in relation to the issues in the petition. It occurred to me when I was updating colleagues that we can also just check with NHS Education for Scotland that the resource does materialise by the end of March. By the time we next consider the petition, we will know whether that package was properly introduced, which I think is a reasonable additional step.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Item 3 is the consideration of new petitions. For those who might be joining our proceedings online this morning, having heard that a petition that they had submitted was to be considered, I note that, in advance of so doing, we ask the Scottish Government for comment and the Scottish Parliament’s independent research unit, the Scottish Parliament information centre, for a briefing on the petition. We do that because, historically, in previous sessions, if we did not do so, that was the first thing that the committee recommended that we do, which often led to an extended delay in our consideration of the issues raised.
The first of the new petitions is PE2056, which was lodged by Stephen Gauld. It calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that provides ministers with the power to call in and, potentially, override council decisions on the hire of public land for large-scale events. Mr Gauld tells us that, over a number of years, his business has tried to hire public land for large-scale events but that the requests have been refused by local authorities. He suggests that his is not the only business that has been impacted.
As the SPICe briefing notes, although the Parliament has legislative competence to enact primary and secondary legislation that impacts local authorities, it is generally up to local authorities to determine how they use their land and property. The Minister for Local Government Empowerment and Planning advises that it is not a matter for the Scottish Government to intervene on and refers to the Verity house agreement, which includes a commitment for local and national government to respect each other’s democratic mandates.
We have received a response from the petitioner, Mr Gauld, commenting on the minister’s response, emphasising the call for a change in the law and noting that the Verity house agreement is not legally binding. Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions for action? Mr Ewing, are you thinking of contributing here?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Part of me wonders whether some local authorities—perhaps smaller local authorities, which are in locations where such permissions might be being sought—feel that their own resource is such that it is easier to say no than it is to say yes, because saying yes involves them in the administration of certain matters for which they feel that they currently do not have the capacity to take forward. That might be, in part, what underpins their views. I would be interested to know whether COSLA felt that there was any substance to that consideration.
Therefore, with the various suggestions that have been made, we will keep the petition open. Although we accept some of the evidence that we have received, and the comment from the Scottish Government, there are issues here that it would be useful for us to explore.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
The second of our new petitions, on which colleagues will note that they have a late submission on the table before them, is PE2064, which has been lodged by Julie Mitchell. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that under-16s who are charged with rape are treated as adults in the criminal justice system. The SPICe briefing explains that certain offences for children over the age of 12 and under the age of 16 must be jointly reported by the police to the children’s reporter and the procurator fiscal. Rape is considered to be an offence that requires joint reporting, and the procurator fiscal decides whether prosecution will proceed in the adult justice system.
10:45Regarding the sex offenders register, where a case proceeds in the adult criminal justice system and results in a conviction for rape, the notification requirements apply regardless of age. However, the length of the notification period is reduced for those under the age of 18. The Lord Advocate is reviewing diversion from prosecution as it relates to sexual offences, to consider whether it is being used appropriately. The Scottish Government’s response to the petition notes that its policy position is to keep children out of the criminal justice system wherever possible and appropriate. However, it recognises
“the need to strike a balance between supporting children who come into conflict with the law and ensuring that our communities are safe and that victims are supported.”
Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Are we content to take forward Mr Torrance’s recommendation and to combine that with the issues that are raised in PE1947?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Some people are even driving camper vans these days.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
Fergus Ewing mentioned his association with you over 25 years. Have you seen a change in the centres of gravity in organisations such as NatureScot in the time that you have been engaging with them?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
You said that you were in Teesdale yesterday. I have visited Teesdale and I seem to recollect that it is renowned for its waterfalls. Am I in the right place?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Jackson Carlaw
PE1952, which was lodged by Jane Clarke, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to instruct Scotland’s NHS to form specialist services, training resources and a clinical pathway for the diagnosis and treatment of patients exhibiting symptoms of autonomic nervous system dysfunction, or dysautonomia. We last considered the petition at our meeting on 17 May 2023.
A recent submission from the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health highlights the results of a questionnaire to a sample of general practices, which included questions on the clinical guideline “Managing the long-term effects of COVID-19”. The survey found that 60 per cent of responding practices were aware of the guideline and 25 per cent were aware of the implementation support note. The content of the implementation support note is being reviewed and updated.
The University of Leeds has been contracted to support the initial evaluation of long Covid services in Scotland. That work will provide an analysis of demand and capacity and of longer-term outcomes for patients, and will compare differences in service models where possible.
The petitioner has stressed that the petition concerns all patients with dysautonomia and not just those with long Covid. She notes that there are no specialist autonomic clinics in Scotland and that cardiology consultants have told PoTS UK that they do not have the expertise to manage patients with dysautonomia. The petitioner welcomes the training resources that are available to healthcare professionals but would like to make it clear that those are not a suitable substitution for specialist services.
Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?