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 2514 contributions
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
It might be useful for the committee to see it.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
I have a general question to start with. Other than arm’s-length foundations, do colleges have a history of creating and owning companies? Universities do, but I had not heard that colleges were into that in any significant way.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
I accept the need for colleges to have a degree of autonomy to run their business, but is there any oversight of the subsidiaries by the SFC?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
I am concerned that colleges could have subsidiaries operating outside of proper monitoring of what are ultimately the public funds that go into setting them up and operating them. Are colleges moving down the same route as universities in creating companies and subsidiaries that they can build up and then spin off in exchange for cash? Is that where they are going?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
I recall an Auditor General—I cannot remember whether it was you or your predecessor—saying that the Auditor General has no locus in auditing ALFs that are college spin-offs. I worry that something could be festering out there, out of public sight, that could impact on a college.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
Other than the immediate relationship between the college and that particular vehicle, would you not have a locus to look into the health or otherwise of the subsidiary, assuming that the majority of the directors are not from the college?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
Clearly, that does not always happen.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
Okay. The report also states:
“College staff were aware of the absence of a contract and appropriate approvals from the early stages of the project in 2020”.
Other than the fact that the non-compliant expenditure was not timeously reported to the college’s finance committee, were proper procedures followed?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
Before Mark MacPherson comes in, can I also ask whether anything in college minutes or records indicates that the matter was even considered?
10:30Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 June 2025
Colin Beattie
I will move on to my final question, which relates to the non-compliant spend. Everybody was aware that no contracts were in place. Who authorised the expenditure, and who should have agreed and put in place those contracts?