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 724 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I have questions based on the helpful written submission that you provided. I will also ask about your process, because I am interested in understanding it better.
You talked about holding public engagement events in areas that might be impacted by the review. I appreciate that you might not be able to answer this off the top of your head, so you might have to follow up in writing, but my question is: where were they? I presume that you did not mention them all. What was the rationale for choosing those specific locations? Were they areas of primary concern, for example, or was there another reason?
10:45
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I think that we are just straying a bit wider here. You have already covered a lot of that territory, and what you have said is understood. I am trying to understand where these events were. It might be an unfair question, given that you might not have the detail in front of you; in that case, can we get that detail on where the public engagement events were? I think that it would be useful for us to understand that.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Yes—you have given the example of Kerrera. In your written submission, you made the point again that you are concerned that no information was forthcoming about how new retained firefighters would be recruited or new crews would be established.
I recognise that you are not going to be able to roll off a list of stations off the top of your head. As much as we have to consider the issue in the strategic sense, it also comes down to specifics. The reason I ask is so that we can have some understanding, if not of the specific set of stations then of the broad criteria—which you have alluded to before, in the case of Kerrera—for how you might tell that something might not be sustainable or might not be able to be kept. It would be useful to understand that. Are you able to follow up on that?
This is about context and understanding the issues better. In your written submission, you talk about the most recent incident statistics, which were published on 30 October last year, and you state:
“non-fatal fire casualties for 2024/25 were 1,069, up 30.8%.”
Obviously that is a concerning figure, but it is not placed in context. Is it up 30.8 per cent from the year before or is it a longer-term trend?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I have a few questions—I am just making that clear at the outset.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I am asking whether the process could be slightly longer, yes.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
You were doing a good job of working your way through that list—we nearly got there. Having those details would be useful, though.
I have a follow-up question. Again, you have already touched on this, but in your submission you say that you welcome some of the benefits of the 23 change options. That might feed into John McKenzie’s point that we cannot just say, “It’s aye been, so we can’t change the service.”
Colin, you were quite specific when you gave the example of Kerrera as a station that you would probably consider to be not sustainable and one that you would not retain—if you will pardon the pun. Can you say more about the stations that you would concede will probably not be kept over the longer term?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I appreciate that there has to be space for the union and the service to talk about those things. I should make clear that I am not advocating for Kerrera fire station to close—it is just that the example was proffered previously. It is not so much about understanding specific locations, but it would be helpful to understand the process and rationale from the union’s perspective, even if we receive that later.
I have one final question. The written submission refers to the online scoring system that was used at the event in Stirling. It sets out that attendees were not able to see any of the final scores and, therefore, were unable to scrutinise the process. It might be an imponderable, because you did not necessarily see the final scores, but could you set out what practical difference it would have made had you had a better line of sight?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I think that we would need to pick that up with the next panel.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I prefer to call someone what they want to be called, but let us just move on. [Laughter.]
You mentioned that the timescale for making a final decision is determined by the governance process, and you suggested that we might need to pick that up with the minister. I think that I am following what you said, but I want to clarify, because it is important.
Pauline McNeill made the reasonable point that the successor committee might want to ask further questions in advance of a decision. I accept that we are not part of the formal decision-making process, but we represent constituents who are impacted. Presumably, it would be in scope for the board to say that it might have a slightly longer process, which would enable that questioning—although I am not suggesting punting the matter into the long grass.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 February 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I am only trying to understand the process.