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 2447 contributions
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
We could have asked lots more questions, but there are time constraints with a Thursday morning slot. Needless to say, we are very grateful to you for bringing your expertise and speaking to the really important report that you have published. I am sure that it will feature in our legacy report, and I have no doubt that our successor committee on the other side of the Scottish elections will return to the issue in due course. For now, I thank you.
We will suspend briefly before moving to our next panel of witnesses.
09:51 Meeting suspended.Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
We turn to our second panel of witnesses for our scrutiny of adult disability payment. I welcome to the meeting Stephen Boyle, the Auditor General for Scotland; and Erin McGinley, senior auditor, performance audit and best value, from Audit Scotland. Thank you both for joining us today. I acknowledge that you sat through the previous evidence session, and we are very grateful for that. I invite the Auditor General to make some brief opening remarks.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
I do not want to get caught up in this, so I will just move on to the next question, which I hope does not sound like a daft-laddie one. How can we objectively measure fairness, dignity and respect? I am unclear about that.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
Because of time constraints, it will have to be brief.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
Are you talking about the end-to-end process?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
I think that that was perhaps a “maybe”, Mr Balfour. I call Carol Mochan.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Bob Doris
That concludes our public business for the day, and we move into private session.
10:42 Meeting continued in private until 11:03.Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 November 2025
Bob Doris
Yes, convener. I just want to put on record what is on page 8 of the briefing that has been prepared for us on this matter. It says:
“A voluntary phaseout by 2025 on the use of lead shot that was led by UK shooting organisations has been shown to be largely ineffective at minimising the use of lead ammunition, and therefore effective regulation is required in this case.”
If UK shooting organisations were content to go for a voluntary phase-out, they must have thought it a practical thing to do, even though it turned out not to be successful in driving the change that we want to see.
I also note that—and this is verbatim from the briefing in front of us:
“The Agency only considered a restriction where appropriate alternatives were available, therefore small calibre bullets (=6.17mm) for live quarry shooting have not been included in the restriction as there was insufficient evidence that viable alternatives were available.”
I do not have any background in this matter, convener, but a briefing that has been prepared for us ahead of this committee meeting seems to substantiate the idea that this was a reasonable thing to do.
I get that your experience in this is very bespoke, convener, but it is only fair to put the alternative view or position on the record this morning, given that it is in our briefing papers.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 November 2025
Bob Doris
I will follow up on that with Dr Dixon and if Clare Wharmby or Professor Roy wants to come in with any reflections, please do, and then I will go to my second question, convener.
Is it about whether Governments get it right or wrong, or is it about the modelling work that they use to predict what will happen? A lot of modelling work will be done on behaviour. Earlier we heard about behavioural change and how households and individuals will buy into it. Clare Wharmby spoke about incentives and disincentives and how to trigger some behavioural change rather than asking people to buy into the overall plan. We want businesses and sectors to change how they do their business, and that will impact every aspect of life.
None of this is an exact science. It is all based on modelling work, which, by definition, gives best guesstimates of what will happen if different inputs are put into policies. No model will ever get it perfect. I suppose, convener, that I am saying that it is not about whether Governments are right or wrong; it is about whether they are using the best and most appropriate set of modelling assumptions to get to those estimates. Maybe the Government has not shown its working, convener.
Are there any thoughts about changing the narrative on that, Dr Dixon? None of it is exact. All of it is about modelling work. Should the Government show a bit more of its workings and be open and straightforward about the fact that, by definition, models are not an exact science?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 November 2025
Bob Doris
That is helpful. Before we go on to my second question, does Clare Wharmby or Graeme Roy want to come in? You do not need to do so, but do you want to reflect on any of that before I move on?