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 2046 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Good morning, and welcome to the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s 12th meeting in session 6. Before we move to the first item on the agenda, I remind everyone present to switch mobile phones to silent.
The first item of business is consideration of the following instrument, which is subject to the affirmative procedure.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 30 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
The regulations were laid yesterday and amend the Covid certification scheme so that it will be possible to access venues or events that are covered by the scheme by showing either proof of vaccination or exemption from the scheme—as happens now—or a recent negative test result. The Scottish Government considers it necessary to implement the change from next Monday, which is 6 December.
The Government has chosen to use the affirmative procedure rather than the made affirmative procedure on this occasion. However, the timescale does not allow for the normal scrutiny timescale for affirmative instruments. Although the committee has in the past called for the affirmative procedure to be used instead of the made affirmative procedure, that should not be at the cost of proper parliamentary scrutiny. I am minded to agree to the timetable that the Scottish Government has set out on this occasion, but I am clear that that does not set a precedent for future regulations.
Although, in the very limited time available, no points have been raised on the instrument, I reserve the committee’s right to look at it again next week, should any issues subsequently be found. We could then write to the Scottish Government to highlight anything that may emerge as a consequence.
Do colleagues have any comments on the instrument?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Does the committee also wish to welcome that the Scottish Government will lay an amending instrument in early course to rectify the error?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Welcome to the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s 11th meeting in session 6. Before we move to the first item on the agenda, I remind everyone present to switch their mobile phones to silent.
The first item of business is to decide whether to take items 4 and 5 in private. Is the committee content to take those items in private?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
The instrument amends the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc (Scotland) Act 2000 (Register of Interests) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/135) in light of changes that have been made to the code of conduct for councillors and the model code of conduct for members of devolved public bodies.
Regulation 2(2) substitutes a schedule to the 2003 regulations with a new schedule, in which the registrable interests of councillors and members of devolved public bodies are described by reference to various paragraphs in the councillors code and the members code respectively.
The committee wrote to the Scottish Government to draw its attention to an error in table B of the schedule that is to be inserted by regulation 2(2). In its response, the Scottish Government confirmed that the omission of category nine, concerning close family members, was an error and has undertaken to lay an amending instrument in early course.
Full details of the error in regulation 2(2) can be read in the correspondence between the committee and the Scottish Government, which can be found in the published papers for this meeting on the committee’s website.
Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground (i), in that the instrument’s drafting appears to be defective due to the error in table B of the schedule?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Is the committee content with the instruments?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Is the committee content with the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Also under this agenda item, no points have been raised on the following instruments.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Finally, in relation to Scottish statutory instrument 2021/410, does the committee wish to note the effect on the instrument of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, as highlighted in the policy note, and highlight that to the lead committee, which is the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee?
Mr Simpson wants to comment.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 23 November 2021
Stuart McMillan
Thank you, Mr Simpson. I am absolutely content with your suggestions regarding highlighting the issue to the lead committee. On the point about the negative and affirmative procedure, which is the most important thing for our committee, you are correct that the affirmative procedure is not available in this instance. Writing to the lead committee is the right thing to do. It is also right to ask the lead committee to consider doing some other work on the issue. I am content to do that. Do other members agree to that approach?
Members indicated agreement.
10:14 Meeting continued in private until 10:40.