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 159 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 29 May 2024
Christina McKelvie
The Scottish Government is determined to reduce alcohol-related harm, including by increasing the minimum unit price and through the record investment in treatment services that it provided in 2023-24. In 2023, the Social Market Foundation, based on research that was carried out by the York Health Economics Consortium in 2010 and the University of Aberdeen in 2012, estimated that the alcohol-related societal and economic costs in Scotland in 2021-22 could have amounted to between approximately £5 billion to £10 billion annually. That research also estimates that the health and social care-related societal costs arising from alcohol use in Scotland could be between £500 million and £700 million annually.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 29 May 2024
Christina McKelvie
We are working with a number of organisations across the board to look at how we tackle alcohol harm in Scotland. I am happy to share that information with Monica Lennon. We are also considering stakeholders’ calls for minimum unit pricing to be uprated on a yearly basis. I will come back to Parliament at a later date with an update on that work, which is currently under way.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 28 May 2024
Christina McKelvie
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect to the app. I would have voted no.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 17 April 2024
Christina McKelvie
I am glad to have the opportunity to address colleagues across the chamber on minimum unit pricing ahead of this crucial vote. The Parliament has the opportunity to show that Scotland continues to be world leading with our policies to improve the health of people in Scotland by voting to continue minimum unit pricing and to increase the price per unit to 65p.
I implore members across the chamber to vote in favour of the orders, in line with the views of more than 80 third sector organisations—that is, people who work on the front line every day—public health experts and senior clinicians, who wrote to voice their support for minimum unit pricing and the proposal to increase the price to 65p per unit.
Minimum unit pricing is an extensively evaluated policy. Public Health Scotland’s independent evaluation estimated that, during the period that was considered, minimum unit pricing reduced the number of alcohol-attributable deaths by 13.4 per cent, which amounts to 156 people a year—that is the “limited evidence”, according to Sandesh Gulhane. Public Health Scotland also said that minimum unit pricing was likely to have reduced the number of hospital admissions wholly attributable to alcohol by 4.1 per cent, compared with what would have happened if MUP had not been in place. The evaluation found no evidence of a significant impact on the alcoholic drinks industry as a whole.
The evaluation has also been commended by internationally renowned public health experts, including Professor Sir Michael Marmot and Professor Sally Carswell. That counters Sandesh Gulhane’s comments. This is what they said:
“Policy makers can be confident that there are several hundred people with low income in Scotland who would have died as a result of alcohol, who are alive today as a result of minimum unit pricing.”
Who to believe? I will stick with the experts.
The decision to propose 65p per unit is underpinned by modelling by the esteemed University of Sheffield, among consideration of many other factors. Those factors are set out in detail in the published business and regulatory impact assessment, which I commended to Sandesh Gulhane at committee, but he has obviously not read it.
The University of Sheffield’s modelling suggests that to maintain the value of the price per unit and therefore to continue to achieve the public health benefits at a level that is estimated by Public Health Scotland’s evaluation, it should be increased to at least 60p. However, it is clear that Scotland continues to experience significant levels of alcohol harm. The Scottish Government is therefore proposing to increase the value of the price per unit to 65p to further increase the public health benefits of the policy—maybe another 156 lives will be saved.
I expect, and modelling predicts, that, if that increase is implemented, it will save those additional lives. I have heard some members’ concerns about the potential effects of the policy on people who consume alcohol at the highest levels. Specialist support and treatment are vital for people with alcohol dependence. To that end, the Scottish Government provided record funding of £112 million in the past financial year to Scotland’s alcohol and drug partnerships. It is therefore simply not true to say that MUP is the only measure that we are taking. That funding supports the delivery of services for people who are alcohol dependent, whether residential rehab, community-based services or other types of vital support.
I implore members to vote in favour of both the orders to reduce the alcohol-related harm that continues to affect far too many people; to vote to reduce harm and save lives—that is easy.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Christina McKelvie
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I was booted out the system. I would have voted yes.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 8 February 2024
Christina McKelvie
The primary mechanism through which the Scottish Government responds to a humanitarian crisis is the humanitarian emergency fund. Decisions on which crises to respond to through the HEF are made by the Scottish ministers, based on recommendations from a panel of eight leading humanitarian aid organisations.
We have recently responded to emergencies in Pakistan, Malawi, Ukraine, Turkey and Syria, and Gaza. Key considerations in those cases were which organisations were already on the ground and able to provide a rapid response and value for money. That was the case for Gaza and, similarly, for Zambia, for which I announced last week £500,000 to respond to a deadly cholera epidemic through the Red Cross.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 8 February 2024
Christina McKelvie
I will ensure that Jamie Greene gets more details on our humanitarian emergency fund and our partners in it. Eight leading humanitarian aid organisations are involved in the decision-making process. When they alert us to an on-going or a possible crisis, we take their advice and decide whether it meets the criteria for funding from the humanitarian emergency fund.
The system that we have in place is well rehearsed and organised. I will ensure that Jamie Greene gets more detail on the HEF and conversations with key partners such as Oxfam, which gives us a sitrep almost every day on the situation in Gaza.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 8 February 2024
Christina McKelvie
I do not think that anyone can look at the images that we are seeing on our TV screens every day and not realise that we need a ceasefire now in order to bring about progress to peace. I wish all the sides well, and I will continue to do that.
We would add our voice to that aim. The Scottish Government supports a two-state solution. We think that it is the only way to progress to peace. In November last year, the First Minister wrote to the Prime Minister in those terms. We will continue to make such representations to the UK Government as the issue continues. Today is another example of the Scottish Government calling on the UK Government to get round the table, call for a ceasefire and make some progress to peace in order to support the people—the civilians—in Gaza.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Christina McKelvie
There is no doubt about the cultural significance of Robert Coltart’s song “Coulter’s Candy”—I am sure that everyone is singing it in their heads as we speak. The song is sung in communities across Scotland and shared across generations.
We welcome and encourage any exploration and celebration of our heritage. I congratulate Christine Grahame on running a keen campaign to have the song and Robert Coltart recognised. Although we cannot guarantee any funding from the Scottish Government or even our partners, Ms Grahame may find it helpful to contact Museums Galleries Scotland, which provides development work and funding on our behalf, for advice and support as she explores the opportunities to tell Robert Coltart’s story.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Christina McKelvie
I am sorry that Christine Grahame has not found the Museums Galleries Scotland route to be fruitful. Other organisations, such as Culture & Business Scotland, may be able to offer assistance. However, I am happy to look into the matter and provide further information to her. I wish her well in her crowdfunder and the commemorations.
As far as tourism goes, I will endeavour to ensure that the minister who is responsible for tourism understands the importance of the work that Christine Grahame is doing in her constituency with regard to Robert Coltart and “Coulter’s Candy”.