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 3582 contributions
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Thank you. Again, that is very helpful to our consideration.
That brings us to the end of the questions that we wanted to put to you. I am enormously grateful. You are all very busy professionals and clinicians, and the time that you have given us to hear your evidence this morning really will help the committee considerably as we consider the petition and how we might take forward some of the issues in it. Thank you all very much for your participation. I say on behalf of everybody here in the Scottish Parliament how very much it has been appreciated.
I will move now to Monica Lennon MSP, who is joining us this morning and has joined the committee on previous occasions when we have considered this petition. Before the committee reflects on what has been heard this morning, which I think that we can all say has been very interesting, is there anything you would like to reflect on and add, Monica?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
PE1930, which was lodged by George Eckton, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that a requirement of future rail contracts is for customers to be given information on the cheapest possible fare as a matter of course and to recognise the vital role of the existing ticket office estate in delivering on that aim.
We previously considered the petition on 23 November, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government and Scottish Rail Holdings Ltd. Unfortunately, a response from Scottish Rail Holdings has not been forthcoming, but we have received a response from Transport Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Government, and members have a copy of that.
In its response, Transport Scotland highlights that the interaction of devolved and reserved matters
“will form part of the Scottish Government’s Consumer Duty scoping work”,
and that the Government is considering whether Scottish Rail Holdings will be covered by the consumer duty legislation.
Transport Scotland has also provided details of the on-going work to enhance smart ticketing across the public transport network, which includes the establishment of the National Smart Ticketing Advisory Board. The response also indicates that the fair fares review might shortly be concluding, if it has not already, to be followed by the launch of a public consultation on a draft vision for public transport.
We have also received a brief submission from the petitioner in which he welcomes the consideration of Scottish Rail Holdings being covered by the consumer duty legislation, while highlighting concerns about advertising of fares and the potential for the digital exclusion of certain groups or individuals.
Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
The next petition, PE1967, is on protecting Loch Lomond’s Atlantic oak wood shoreline by implementing the high road option for the A82 upgrade between Tarbet and Inverarnan. A theme is developing here. The petition, which was lodged by John Urquhart on behalf of Helensburgh and District Access Trust and the Friends of Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to reconsider the process for selecting the preferred option for the planned upgrade of the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan, and to replace the design manual for roads and bridges-based assessment with the more comprehensive Scottish transport appraisal guidance.
Jackie Baillie has remained with us in order to contribute to our deliberations on the petition again.
We previously considered the petition on 21 December 2022, when we agreed to write to Transport Scotland, Argyll and Bute Council, the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority and the Lochaber Chamber of Commerce. Since then, we have received responses from the national park authority, Transport Scotland and the council, which are included in the papers that are before us.
The response from the national park authority notes its concerns about the road design, with the caveat that a formal view will be provided once Transport Scotland finalises the proposal. It also highlights that, without further consideration of the details, it is not clear that the high road route would provide a more environmentally favourable option.
Transport Scotland has provided a lengthy and quite technical submission, which details its assessment process and the community engagement that has taken place on the A82 scheme to date. In particular, I draw members’ attention to comments on an Audit Scotland investigation into concerns relating to the application of the Scottish transport appraisal guidance.
We have also received a late submission from the petitioner, which was circulated to members. It outlines their response to the submissions that we have received.
Before I ask committee members for their thoughts on how we should proceed, I invite Jackie Baillie to contribute to our deliberations.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
PE1952 is on instructing Scotland’s NHS to form specialist services for patients with automatic dysfunction—sorry, that should be autonomic dysfunction, which is quite different. The petition, 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.
PoTS UK’s recent submission disagrees with the Scottish Government, stating that many patients
“do not have access to the best possible care and support”,
and that PoTS, or postural tachycardia syndrome, is
“not well recognised within the cardiology profession”.
The submission highlights that there are no established pathways to diagnose and treat PoTS in adults across most health boards.
Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland’s written submission notes that
“Nearly 200,000 people in Scotland”
have long Covid and that 76 per cent of long Covid patients had symptoms of dys—gosh, how am I going to say this?—dysautonomia. However, it states that patients with dysautonomia
“struggle to access medical support ... and people ... with PoTS often wait years for a diagnosis”.
Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland calls for
“quicker and more co-ordinated diagnostic and treatment pathways”
for people with long Covid and for
“the creation of a clinical pathway that integrates with existing SIGN”—
or Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network—
“guidelines.”
It also supports training for general practitioners and
“further scoping to ascertain the size”
of the need for specialist support for people with dysautonomia.
11:00The written response from NHS National Services Scotland states that it
“would not anticipate”
being
“invited to commission a national specialist service,”
devote “training resources” or develop “a clinical pathway”,
due to
“the broad range of local services and specialities”
around
“autonomic dysfunctions.”?
That was all quite technical, but important nonetheless. Do members have any comments or suggestions?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Dysautonomia.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Are members content to proceed with that request for further information?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
Are we agreed on those actions?
Members indicated agreement.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
I also suggest that we look at the possibility of arranging a visit for those members of the committee who might like to visit the area. It is quite a complicated issue and a physical appreciation of all that is being discussed would probably assist members.
That brings us to the end of item 2. Thank you, again, Ms Baillie, for your participation.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
We move to the further consideration of continued petitions. PE1916, which was lodged by Councillors Douglas Philand and Donald Kelly, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to instigate a public inquiry on the political and financial management of the A83 Rest and Be Thankful project, which is to provide a permanent solution for the route. It is a cause célèbre with which the committee is familiar, our having discussed it with regard to various petitions over a considerable period of time. No doubt Jackie Baillie, who joins the committee’s proceedings this morning, has done so, too. I welcome Ms Baillie to the meeting.
We last considered the petition on 9 November, when we again agreed to write to the Scottish Government. Since then, we have received a response from Transport Scotland, which indicates that
“potential route designs”
for a permanent solution
“are being progressed”,
with an expectation that a preferred route option will be announced “by Spring 2023”.
As an aside, I recently read a novel in which somebody said that Stockholm does spring very nicely, to which the riposte was yes, but in July. Now that we are getting nearer to July, the Scottish spring might well be what we used to call summer. However, here we are.
Transport Scotland’s response also notes
“the preferred medium term solution”
of improvements to the existing old military road, which was announced in December 2022. I remember visiting that with David Torrance a number of years ago for previous committee consideration of a petition.
We have also received a submission from the petitioners, highlighting concerns that improvements to the old military road might delay progress on a permanent solution as well as seeking information on Transport Scotland’s timetable for progressing a permanent solution. As I recall, when someone gets to the end of the old military road, they are confronted with quite a tricky topographical consideration. It is very steep and windy.
Before I open up the discussion to wider comments, I am delighted to ask Jackie Baillie whether she would like to contribute anything at this stage. She is probably as perplexed as I am by the definition of spring.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 17 May 2023
Jackson Carlaw
From what you have both said, it sounds as though there was a driving necessity to bring about a change in the arrangements that were in place. Every bit as much as clinicians and others thought that it was the right way forward, it sounds as though the previous arrangements were potentially dangerously unstable in terms of being able to provide a service.
On that basis, I am interested to know whether, to your knowledge, in the interim since 2016, the practice that you have evolved has been rolled out to other parts of the United Kingdom outside Scotland. In so far as you were able to establish a service, will you tell us what the main challenges were in trying to bring about what you have achieved, as a general introduction to the questions that will then follow? I do not know who will volunteer to speak.