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 1221 contributions
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 June 2025
Liz Smith
I ask the question because you have considerable experience of dealing with the broad issues in the social security system and you have had considerable success in doing that. It is incumbent on this committee and others to listen to that experience. When it comes to advising the Government about the facts that it will have to interrogate before presenting its policy, it is very important that it is given guidance on where it can make the biggest difference, especially to people in poverty. That might involve some difficult decisions, particularly, as I say, against the backdrop that the Scottish Fiscal Commission is providing. I am just interested to know whether—
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 June 2025
Liz Smith
Forgive me, but I am picking up on what is in our papers. I think that this is a very important part of the whole social security debate, and any advice that SCoSS can provide to us on that evidence would be very helpful.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 June 2025
Liz Smith
I will ask about universalism. Mr Pybus, as you are well aware, there is a massive issue around the principle of universalism. It is very nice to say that, in theory, we want to pay out benefits to people universally. As the Government describes it, it is vitally important to our social contract with the people of Scotland that we try to provide benefits across the board. However, if you look at what the medium-term financial strategy told us yesterday, and particularly at what the Scottish Fiscal Commission is telling the Finance and Public Administration Committee, we cannot afford it all. That is the bottom line.
When it comes to supporting those who are most in need, do you think that the principle of universalism is the right approach, or do you think we have to be a bit more careful and try to target those who are in considerable need first?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 June 2025
Liz Smith
I am not asking about the policy role; I am asking about some of the evidence that SCoSS has provided, but I will leave it there. I just think that we could benefit from SCoSS’s experience if it could tell us what we should be looking at.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 June 2025
Liz Smith
Forgive me, convener, but I think that SCoSS has considerable experience that can help us.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Liz Smith
I find that a bit concerning.
I want to come to an issue that is troubling the committee a great deal. It relates to transparency and good government. Let us be honest: our job is to scrutinise both of those things as they relate to the spending of public money. The context is that an increasing number of framework bills are being introduced to the Parliament. Due to the bills’ very nature, it is very difficult for a minister to put the full cost on the table, because stakeholder engagement is on-going. In turn, that has led to a number of financial memorandums, which this committee has not been at all satisfied with, and we have sent several of them back. Is the growing number of framework bills a problem?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Liz Smith
To ensure that it does work well, the committees must work well. The bigger our frustration, particularly from a financial angle, the more difficult it is for us to carry out effective scrutiny. With all due respect, I do not think that that is our fault. We try our best to ensure that we have all the facts to hand and that we scrutinise as much as we can, but we are frustrated due to a number of aspects of how the legislation, especially the financial memorandums that accompany it, is presented to us.
We recommend that a big discussion on that be had with the Scottish Government. If that were done it would be greatly appreciated.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Liz Smith
It is very important, because the Parliament has to work well.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Liz Smith
Is there also a concern that a number of bills that have come to the Parliament have been subject to a very considerable number of amendments, particularly at stages 2 and 3? It is becoming much more difficult for the Parliament to get through Government business because of the size and complexity of a lot of those bills. There are many cases: I can think of three bills, including the Education (Scotland) Bill, to which a large number of amendments have been lodged, but then they have not been moved or have been rejected. Is that aspect of the legislative process a concern for the Government?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 June 2025
Liz Smith
There is a feeling among the public and, indeed, some parliamentarians, that, for some time, we have been passing legislation that is far from perfect—in some cases we have had to come back to it or even to repeal it. I suggest that one reason for that is that the Parliament’s legislative process has become much more complex and difficult. When it comes to good government and accountability for public money, that must be a concern.