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 (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 4 November 2021
Liz Smith
To ask the Scottish Government what actions the constitution secretary is taking to continually improve interactions with the other devolved Administrations as well as the UK Government. (S6O-00326)
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 4 November 2021
Liz Smith
I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. He knows, however, that the agreement on joint working that was put together to maintain positive and constructive relations was based on mutual respect. He also knows that there has been a very welcome agreement in recent days between his colleague Kate Forbes and Simon Clarke at the Treasury about the parameters for the future of the fiscal framework discussions.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that Scotland fares very much better when both the Scottish and UK Governments, and the other devolved nations, work together and there is not a constant focus on another referendum?
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 2 November 2021
Liz Smith
I will concentrate on the public procurement angle, because having the right public procurement will go a long way to ensure that we have fair work practices.
I hope that there is one thing that can unite the Parliament in these difficult times: the drive to ensure that we get better value for public money and that we do so as openly and transparently as possible. The public deserves no less. They surely have a right to know exactly where their money goes and why elected members of the Scottish Parliament make certain choices, particularly when it comes to jobs and fair work. We must be held fully accountable for every decision that we make, especially on public finance. The Finance and Public Administration Committee, several members of which are in the chamber, certainly sees its scrutiny role as absolutely paramount in all its activities; so, too, does Audit Scotland.
In 2018, the then Auditor General, Caroline Gardner, strongly criticised the Scottish Government for the limited information that was made publicly available to enable scrutiny of the financial support that is given to several private companies. It is quite clear that, at Ferguson Marine, Burntisland Fabrications and Prestwick airport, transparency has not been as good as it should be.
On the request for openness and transparency, it is important that there is a proper structure around the Scottish Government consolidated accounts. A serious problem with Ferguson Marine was that, although it was a fully Government-owned company with Scottish ministers as the only shareholders, it did not fall into the Scottish Government consolidated accounts.
Caroline Gardner was absolutely correct when she said that, to deliver best value, we need good governance structures and effective management—she said that persistently during her time in office, and her successor is doing the same. That is what is required of local authorities and it should be the same for the Scottish Government.
In his speech, the minister mentioned the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014, which demands that public bodies consider not only the economic outcomes of procurement but what would enhance social and environmental wellbeing, which several members have referred to. This is a good week to talk about the additional concerns of social and environmental wellbeing.
There is growing demand for help for local economies. My colleague Stephen Kerr mentioned that, as did Willie Rennie. We can do a lot more to help our local economies.
The Federation of Small Businesses has made two very strong points on that front. First, it would be very good for a much higher percentage of procurement funding to go to smaller firms to help local jobs and local investment. We must bear in mind that many smaller firms have been the bedrock of our communities during Covid. Secondly, it is true that Covid has not made things easy when it comes to tracking the money, but that should not be used as an excuse.
I finish on what I think is a very important point: not only are openness and transparency good practice in measuring best value for taxpayers’ money, but they are essential if there is to be renewed trust between Government and the public. There is much in the media about how politics—and maybe even politicians—has lost its integrity when it comes to that transparency and openness. That is not good for society, it is not good for where our public money is going, and it is certainly not good for rebuilding Scotland after Covid.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 28 October 2021
Liz Smith
Yes, I would. I thank committee members for giving up their time to listen to what I have to say.
Most people around the table are aware that, during the 15 years that I have been in the Parliament, outdoor education has been a strong personal interest. As time has gone on, I have been struck by how much it means to many members across the political spectrum. You will know from recent members’ business debates and discussions that we have had on the subject that it is capturing the imagination.
In relation to the Covid situation, outdoor education and all the assets that it brings are vital to young people’s wellbeing. It is clear from what members have said in debates that there is an issue in relation to pressures on education and, especially, outdoor education centres.
I have convened the cross-party group on sport for some time. There is a distinction between sport and outdoor education, and one of the gaps in the Parliament is that we do not have a sufficiently discrete group on outdoor education. I spoke to various colleagues across the political spectrum when thinking about setting up the group, and they are very keen that I do so.
That is where we are. I did an informal consultation about it and spoke to a lot of people with whom I have considerable contact in the outdoor education world. We agreed that not only would it help the Parliament to engage with that increasingly important sector but it would help local authorities, schools and people who have a strong interest in the unmeasurable aspect of education, which I would defend as being the most important. We all feel passionately about that.
Those are the basic reasons for the group, convener. I set out its purpose in my paper.
10:15Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 28 October 2021
Liz Smith
That is correct.
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 28 October 2021
Liz Smith
The criticism focused on the weakness of detail, policy timescales and significant contradictions in Covid recovery policy, which is one of the reasons why our amendment focuses on those aspects.
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 28 October 2021
Liz Smith
What is the Scottish Government’s reaction to yesterday’s call from the Scottish Tourism Alliance to extend the period of business rates relief in retail, hospitality and leisure on a similar basis to that announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday?
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 28 October 2021
Liz Smith
The Deputy First Minister, Murdo Fraser and Daniel Johnson all said in their opening remarks that the key priority has to be minimising the Covid threat and addressing the many other health issues arising from it, and that is right. However, I am just as certain that the second priority for the public and the Scottish business sector is to ensure that we have a strong economic recovery—one that is sustainable in the future, not just in the short term, and we have to be mindful that predictions are showing that growth rates may well slow in that future.
The good news, as we saw in yesterday’s budget, is that the current economic forecasts on growth are much better than was previously thought might be the case. However, as the chancellor said yesterday, that needs to be set against the inflationary pressures, the rise in the cost of living and the rise in national insurance charges, even if it is generally accepted that those have a part to play in addressing the huge issue in health and social care spending.
Those inflationary pressures are strong—we only have to look at the petrol prices over the past 10 days to realise how strong they are—so growth is critical not just for jobs, investment and tax revenues, but to encourage greater economic optimism. One thing that would immediately provide some optimism is for the Scottish Government to continue to provide business rates relief for the retail and hospitality sectors for longer. The Scottish Government was very generous in the past financial year and it would be good to hear from the Deputy First Minister what it intends to do now.
The overwhelming message from the retail and hospitality sectors, and from some of the witnesses who have appeared at the Finance and Public Administration Committee, is that business continues to need considerable support. The Scottish Retail Consortium tells us that footfall is still 20 per cent below the pre-pandemic level and that serious questions remain about the viability of some businesses. Many of them have incurred substantial debt burdens and this is a difficult time for them, wondering whether they will continue in the future. That is why the Scottish Government’s business rates waiver was very welcome. I urge the Government to concentrate on that for the immediate future, because business is crying out for it.
We have also been told by several key stakeholders that much more has to be done to stimulate local economies. That, of course, is the main reason why we have the levelling-up programme, and it was good to see more detail about that yesterday. It was also good to hear Kate Forbes welcoming that funding on the radio this morning.
This Parliament may be united in its support for schemes such as the Scotland Loves Local fund, but if our local economies are to be truly successful, a lot more must be done. The Conservatives persistently argue for much more to be done to encourage our schools, hospitals and other public bodies to procure more local produce. Yesterday, the higher education rankings came out. Those were interesting not only for the usual reasons, but because they looked at the wellbeing aspects of our universities. It was good to see two Scottish universities high up the table in relation to the measure on improving local procurement. There are lots of lessons to be learned from them.
One of the biggest issues is labour. Unemployment has not risen in the way that it was expected to and job vacancies continue to be very high. That tells us that there is a mismatch of skills and problems with flexibility in the labour force. I was interested to hear the Deputy First Minister’s comments about education and skills. He is absolutely right in that regard, but we need to look in much greater detail at what to do, and at the timeframe in which to do that work, because the issue is crucial.
Finally, the provision of greater “certainty and stability”—I use those words because they are the words that Kate Forbes used—is critical when it comes to taking a much more coherent and holistic approach to economic policy making and ensuring that Scotland remains fully competitive with other economies. That is most especially the case in relation to England’s economy, given just how important it is, as we know from last week’s export statistics.
The Scottish Government, as it knows, was recently criticised for not listening sufficiently well to business, whether on the broad scope of economic policy, difficulties with vaccination passports or the ability to access available support.
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 26 October 2021
Liz Smith
I warmly welcome the Scottish Government’s response to the new year’s day trading consultation. The minister knows full well that the retail sector’s overwhelming view was that such a statutory closure of shops on new year’s day would be a retrograde step at the very time when we are doing everything possible to get the sector back on its feet. Such a closure would also have sent a contradictory message to tourists, who we encourage to come to Scotland in the festive period.
I have three specific questions that have arisen from evidence that the Finance and Public Administration Committee has taken recently. What is the Scottish Government doing to assess the changes in consumer purchasing behaviour—not just the technological changes that the minister mentioned—as a result of the Covid situation? Those changes have huge implications for the retail sector and it is incumbent on the Scottish Government to assess them.
The minister was right to mention Scotland Loves Local, which has strong cross-party support. Will he spell out what action the Scottish Government is taking, in line with local authorities, to ensure that our schools, hospitals and other public bodies do an awful lot more to enhance public procurement of local produce? The record on that is not particularly good.
What measures is the Scottish Government taking, in line with the banking sector, to address the high level of debt in some smaller firms in the retail sector as a result of Covid?
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Meeting date: 26 October 2021
Liz Smith
The First Minister says on page 5 of her statement that it is for practical reasons that the Scottish Government has decided to make the change from a day 2 PCR test to a lateral flow test, yet in previous statements she has said that it is for medical reasons. If it is for practical reasons, is it not the case that that change could have been made at the same time as it was made for England and Wales, which would have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble?