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 999 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
There is a lot in there.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
I understand the frustration that we have not progressed matters at a greater pace. However, as I outlined previously, the process is there for a reason. Do I think that it is clunky? Yes, I do. Do I think that it takes too long? Yes, I do. However, we do not intend to go the other way, where we just designate willy-nilly and it creates difficulties for us. There is a balance to be struck, and we are willing to explore what that balance would look like.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
Earlier, I mentioned the word “perspective”, and everybody has a perspective on these things. There are people who will want FOISA to be rolled out far more widely than it has been and there are others who, rightly, are coming to a view on what they would consider to be shortcomings. I have acknowledged that there are shortcomings, and I have also acknowledged that I understand the frustration about the pace—I do not accept that it is glacial, but I know that it is not what some people would want it to be. However, I have also outlined the process that has to be followed to ensure that we get it right.
I think that the bill has usefully brought FOISA back into focus and has aired—or, more accurately, is airing—people’s concerns. As I said earlier, because of the lateness of the bill’s introduction in the parliamentary calendar, it may time out. That may be what happens. However, I would like to think that the issues that the bill has aired could at least contribute to, if not form part of the basis for, what will be done in the next session to address the issues that we have identified and that the bill identifies, accepting that there will be different viewpoints on some of the proposals, as we have heard today. We have been clear in the memorandum that we do not rule out the possibility of the need for further legislation. As the convener has alluded to eloquently, AI is an example of where we might need further legislation on what it will do and whether it will make freedom of information easier to implement, for example.
I am not being critical of the bill—I think that it has been very useful—but our job is to look at the practical application of some of the issues, examine the unintended consequences and help the Parliament to interrogate that and come to the appropriate conclusions. Sometimes, that paints us as being negative and resistant to things.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
I have been back in it for only nine weeks.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
We have to be clear: the process that is followed determines whether the initial look at a body and all its elements is confirmed by the activity that takes place to make sure that every aspect of its work is captured. I am choosing my words carefully, convener, because at times I get very frustrated by process.
I would like to see this and other things move more quickly. I accept that there is a discussion to be had about how to develop the process to make it move more quickly, but it has to maintain its integrity.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
I accept that we do, but I would say to you that this is the Parliament. It has a responsibility to make sure that there are not unintended consequences from the practical application of what may at first glance be considered an appropriate way to go. I am just saying that there is a balance to be struck, and I accept that that balance needs to shift from where it is currently, but we must at all times ensure that the action that we take is appropriate.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
You will appreciate that our job is to interrogate the workability of proposals.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
We have been doing work on that, as you might imagine. It has not concluded, but, as things stand, we have identified only one company that we believe will be captured by that—Research Data Scotland. The members of the company are the Scottish ministers, Public Health Scotland and a number of universities. I am not saying that that will be the definitive list, but we have identified one.
We recognise that there is an anomaly, and we are supportive of the approach that is proposed in the bill, because it would allow us to address that anomaly.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
It is not about not wanting to see that progress—
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Graeme Dey
It goes back to those age-old questions about how quickly organisations can be designated and whether the whole process should be sped up. I have some sympathy for that argument and can understand frustration from the outside about the time the process takes, but if you consider all the requirements that need to be met to get the process right, you see that much of that time is necessary. I would certainly be happy to explore how the process could be sped up without compromising it or its robustness in any way.