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: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
I will move on. In response to the committee’s call for views, the Faculty of Procurators of Caithness said that it thought that there should be a specific provision for an interested person or organisation
“to raise concerns about the Judicial Factors management of the estate.”
It proposed that concerns should be raised first with the Accountant of Court and that, if a party was unsatisfied with the outcome, there would then be a role for the court.
A number of witnesses have suggested that various complaints procedures already exist in practice and that the bill says all that is necessary on the subject. Does the Scottish Government think that the complaints process needs to be made clearer—either in the bill or in some other way?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
As has been discussed today and in previous sessions, somebody who becomes a judicial factor does not necessarily have to be from a regulated profession. When Missing People appeared before the committee last week, its representative said that they felt that it was not clear from the bill what the complaints procedure is—for example, if one family member of a missing person has concerns about how another family member is operating as a judicial factor. They also felt that, although setting out the complaints procedure would be helpful, it did not need to appear in the bill but, instead, could appear in guidance. From their evidence, the consideration would be that, when a missing person is involved, not every judicial factor is from a regulated profession—they could be a family member. Will you consider those concerns with regard to guidance?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Is the committee content with the instruments?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Is the committee content with the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Under agenda item 4, we are considering one instrument, on which no points have been raised.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Under agenda item 5, we will take evidence on the Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill from Siobhian Brown MSP, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety. The minister is accompanied by two Scottish Government officials: Michael Paparakis, policy and bill programme manager, and Megan Stefaniak from the legal directorate.
I welcome you all to the meeting. I remind you not to worry about turning your microphones on, as that will be done for you automatically. Before we move to questions, I invite the minister to make some opening remarks.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
When Missing People was before the committee, it raised the interesting issue of the purpose of a judicial factor appointment in the context of the estate of a missing person. It pointed out that what a missing person might have done with their estate—for example, providing support for elderly relatives—might not always coincide with what is in the best interests of the estate, such as the conservation of funds. Will you provide further clarification on which approaches a judicial factor can take if there is such conflict? Is there a need for a specific legislative statement in the context of missing people?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
It would be useful if you could keep the committee updated on any progress on that.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Do colleagues have any further questions?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 7 May 2024
Stuart McMillan
Tim Eagle has some questions.