Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 1056 contributions
|
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
David Torrance
I am younger than the convener, but I remember when Kirkcaldy swimming club was in the harbour, and its membership numbers were very few until we got a pool in Kirkcaldy and I learned to swim.
On the benefits of swimming and the health and wellbeing of the population of Scotland, I once played football, but I am no longer able to do that physical activity, so I recently got a membership for a swimming club in Kirkcaldy, and I use it two or three times a week. As Abi Thomson says, I now interact socially with a number of people there. Will somebody expand a wee bit on how the health and wellbeing of the population of Scotland is affected by swimming?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
David Torrance
In the light of the evidence, perhaps the committee would consider closing PE1657 under rule 15.7 of standing orders for the following reasons: the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has stated that it would not be realistic to promise new dualling in relation to the A77; the Scottish Government has completed five major road improvement projects on the A77; and regular six-monthly meetings have been established between the petitioner, Transport Scotland, and Amey. In addition, the committee has undertaken significant work to explore the issues that are raised in the petition.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
David Torrance
In the light of the evidence, perhaps the committee would consider closing petition PE1610 under rule 15.7 of standing orders for the following reasons: the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has stated that it would not be realistic to promise new dualling in relation to the A77 and A75; the Scottish Government has completed six major road improvement projects on the A75, and work is in progress to design and assess the options to bypass Springholm and Crocketford on the A75; and regular six-monthly meetings have been established between the petitioner, Transport Scotland, and Amey. In addition, the committee has undertaken significant work to explore the issues that are raised in the petition
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
David Torrance
Perhaps the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders for the following reasons: Audit Scotland has investigated concerns about the application of the STAG guidance and concluded that the STAG process had been applied in the initial stages of the work on the A82; the Scottish Government has previously stated that it is unwilling to carry out a reappraisal of the preferred route option for the upgrade to the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan as it would repeat work that has already been carried out, resulting in
“considerable delay and additional cost”,
and has confirmed that members of the public and other stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide formal comment or objection to the proposed scheme during the statutory consultation period; and Transport Scotland officials are continuing to engage with the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority on the detail and the make-up of the scheme, including having discussions on how to incorporate active travel facilities throughout the whole scheme in a sympathetic way.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
Thank you, convener.
Good morning. Cabinet secretary, I believe from your opening statement that the access to the Argyll and Bute project would be funded from the capital budget. As you know, the committee has a long-standing history with the Rest and Be Thankful going as far back as session 4 of the Parliament. We have visited the site and seen improvements to catchment nets, to the stabilising of the hill and to the old military road. What assurances can you give that the capital budget that is in place will deliver long-term solutions?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
The petitioners have questioned the usefulness of the proposed long-term solution for Rest and Be Thankful and have argued for a tunnel or a viaduct. Why have those suggestions not been taken on board?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
I will bow to your wisdom, convener.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
I withdraw my recommendations.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
In the light of the lack of evidence that the committee has received, should the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the responses to the consultation on ending the sale of energy drinks to children and young people did not raise any issues associated with fast-release caffeine gum? The UK Athletics supplements position statement provides athletes with clear advice on how to reduce risk in the use of supplements, which would include fast-release caffeine gum, and the Scottish Government previously indicated that it will not be pursuing research on fast-release caffeine products at this time.
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee (Draft)
Continued Petitions
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
David Torrance
The petitioner has achieved their aims, although slightly later than they would have wanted. Given that fact, and the evidence that we have been given, the committee should consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that the Scottish Government has published its international culture strategy, which noted that the review was under way, and states that the Scotland + Venice project has been an important platform through which to showcase Scottish creative practitioners. Further, the review into Scotland’s participation in the Venice biennale has now concluded and Creative Scotland and partners are expected to publish it in the coming weeks and to set out plans for participation in the Scotland + Venice project in 2026.
