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 841 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
I understand exactly what you are talking about and can see how what you have said provides a bit of clarity on sections 25 and 26. However, is not there a wee issue for beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries in terms of trustees having too much power? Trustees might decide to go forward in a way that means that the beneficiary does not get as much from the trust as they otherwise might have had.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
That is very clear, considering how woolly my question was. [Laughter.]
Ross Anderson, do you have anything to add?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
If there are no other views, those answers have covered my question. Everyone here seems to be of broadly the same mind. That information will be very useful for us, so I thank you.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
I move to sections 25 and 26 of the bill. Section 25 requires trustees to tell a beneficiary that they are a beneficiary—that did not really surprise me, but there you go—and to give all the trustees’ names and correspondence details. Under section 25, those duties are mandatory for certain types of beneficiaries, while trustees have some discretion as to what information is provided for potential beneficiaries.
Section 26 covers the information that must be made available to beneficiaries. A trust deed can override section 26, but a court can later review the reasonableness of that override. It has been said in various correspondence and by the previous panel that trustees’ duties to provide information to beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries under those sections of the bill are too onerous. Do you have any ideas about whether that is the case? Would you amend the sections to address those concerns? Would anyone who is dead interested in the matter like to go first? [Laughter.]
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
That is another angle. Thank you very much.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
My next question is for Laura Dunlop. The Law Society did not comment on the policy underpinning section 49. However, it said that the drafting of the domicile subsection was unclear in terms of its scope. The Law Society also said that the scope of the separate power of the protector to determine the trust’s “administrative centre” was also unclear. Should work be done on whether that should be continued?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 16 May 2023
Bill Kidd
I have a question on section 61, which is on the alteration of trust purposes in family trusts, which we have dabbled in slightly already.
Section 61 says that after such a private trust has been in existence for 25 years, the Court of Session will have the power to alter the trust’s purposes—its aims, objectives and so on. A shorter minimum period can be specified in the legal document that creates a particular trust.
In the committee’s call for views, six of the 12 respondents who commented on section 61 said that they thought that 25 years is too long. I do not want to go too far, but Alice Pringle was one of the respondents who suggested that, as was Anderson Strathern, among a number of others. The Faculty of Advocates said that
“The imposition of such a lengthy period ... is notable.”
Section 61 gives the power to apply to the court to alter the trust purposes of a family trust. The views on the 25-year restriction have been mixed and many respondents have said that 25 years is too long. Are you satisfied with that time period?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 11 May 2023
Bill Kidd
As soon as that.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 11 May 2023
Bill Kidd
Thank you, convener. How about injecting a wee bit of excitement into the morning and having a couple of questions about Scottish income tax administration? That is always something to keep you on your toes.
The committee is already familiar with the service level agreement between the Scottish Government and HMRC. It is publicly available, reviewed annually and changed as necessary. Are the terms of reference and the minutes of meetings of the board publicly available? That was wondered and the question was asked, and the answer that was given to us was that there were no details of the income tax board or minutes in the public domain. Why is there no publicly available information on the Scottish income tax board? Would it be possible to publish details about agenda items and the minutes from Scottish income tax board meetings?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 11 May 2023
Bill Kidd
That is perfectly reasonable. That will happen this tax year—is that right?