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 1936 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 May 2025
Liz Smith
I am currently representing a constituent who lodged a complaint with NHS Forth Valley back in October 2024. Other than three holding replies that were received up to the beginning of January, my constituent is still waiting.
When I approached NHS Forth Valley, I was informed that, because of staff shortages, it was now working only on complaints that were received during August 2024 and that it would be unlikely that my constituent would receive a response until at least October 2025, which is a whole year after the initial complaint was made. Given what the cabinet secretary has just said, I hope that he will agree that that is completely unacceptable and that it is certainly not within the 20 days that it is supposed to be the case for investigation. What action will the cabinet secretary take?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
I would like to ask two questions, if I may. First, in some situations, the terms of reference of public inquiries have changed—I think that that has happened in three out of 10 inquiries since 2007—and, therefore, there has been a potential for costs to increase. Is it your understanding that those terms of reference changed because the chair of the inquiry found unforeseen evidence that led them somewhere else and, therefore, they had to go back to the Scottish Government to ask for an amendment to the terms of reference?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Minister, you are correct in saying that, at the time, there was substantial stakeholder engagement—obviously, the bill has a substantial impact for the country. However, by and large, those stakeholders were telling you that what was proposed in the initial bill was not at all satisfactory and that, on a cost basis, it was going to be unaffordable. That is what was coming back and, as you know, four committees of the Parliament had considerable concerns about the original bill.
My question is about the co-design principle. If co-design is to work well, surely the stakeholders with whom the Scottish Government is engaging must be able to flag up those concerns early doors, so that we do not get into this kind of situation, in which there has been a very substantial change—part 1 of the bill has completely gone—and we are repurposing four attempts at a financial memorandum. Do you accept that the principle of co-design has not worked in this instance?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
But that did not happen with the first iteration.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Before I ask my next question, I put on the record that I am involved in the Eljamel inquiry through my casework.
If it transpires during the inquiry that other jurisdictions might have some influence on determining what evidence is relevant and what might apply, how would the chair of the inquiry in Scotland take that on board in their discussions with the Scottish Government?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
The convener was asking about the possible costs. Do you predict that the stage 3 amendments may push up costs?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Given that on-going co-design, can I ask the minister what kind of amendments she is expecting at stage 3?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
The Government has made great play of the co-design principle—which, I note, is still one of the underlying principles behind the change. At the start, minister, both you and your predecessor, Kevin Stewart, made a great play of the co-design. What went wrong that led to such a substantial change being made to the proposed legislation?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
What criteria would you use in deciding that an inquiry should be judge led?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
In your experience, would that discussion be had between the Scottish Government and a proposed chair?