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 2881 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
Okay. Thanks.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
The convener touched on various areas, and I want to explore the integration authorities a little more.
This might be my ignorance, but a lot of terms are floating around. We used to talk about integration joint boards; in Glasgow, we talk about the health and social care partnership; and now we are talking about an integration authority. Are those just three different names for the same thing?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
Okay—that is helpful. I will probably explore that on my own at some future point.
Some of the points that have been made refer back to the way in which funding has worked for integration joint boards or integration authorities. Sometimes, it seems that the council and the health board have put in funding and then almost taken it back. There is a suggestion—if I can find the wording—that it is an almost circular process. At one point, the business case document says:
“funds were ceded to IAs and then largely given back to the hosts”.
At another point, it says:
“In practice much of the funding appears to be ‘circular,’ with funding allocated to the IJB from the local authority and health board, which then directs it back to the local authorities and health boards (and Health and Social Care Partnerships)”.
Will the new system work better? Will there be better integration? On the one hand, integration is a good thing, but it can also make it difficult for councils and health boards to follow the pound.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
I was thinking of practical issues. It is a slightly different topic, but we had an issue in Glasgow with link workers, who are linked to general practices. The local general practitioner opinion—that is, the NHS—said that link workers were good and that we needed to fund them, but the HSCP said that it could not fund them and the Government came in with more money. Would that kind of decision making change in future?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
In the programme business case, you contrast what would happen if we carried on as usual with what could happen if we had the new system. It says that a new system could enable various things, such as
“strategic integration, national oversight, accountability and opportunities to invest in preventative care rather than crisis responses,”
and the possibility of avoiding
“expenditure on poor outcomes such as those that are experienced by people who are delayed in hospital”.
The business case goes on to say:
“there could be considerable costs that are avoidable if the current system can be improved”.
Can you go into that a little bit more? Are we saying that passing the bill and having the national care service will automatically produce savings that we can put into preventative care? The committee has been looking at that issue for quite a long time now. Alternatively, is it just that there is a possibility of savings?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
John Mason
Surely, information sharing cannot in itself lead to big savings, can it?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 18 January 2024
John Mason
You have mentioned the long-term plan for towns, and the seven towns that were chosen, a number of times. Can you say a little more about how the seven towns were chosen?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 18 January 2024
John Mason
When will we be able to make a judgment as to whether the UK, and some of those communities, have been levelled up?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 18 January 2024
John Mason
It all seems very complex. Clearly you, the councils and the Scottish Government all have staff doing quite a lot of work on this, with you analysing the figures, councils putting in bids in the competitive process and so on. In retrospect, do you think that having so many funds with so many factors has been the best way of allocating the money? You could have just said, “Well, based on SIMD or whatever, we will top up the housing budget across the UK”, and that would have been pretty welcome in most council areas and would have saved all the analysis and the applications. Would that not have been better?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 18 January 2024
John Mason
Mr Gove, the term “levelling up” suggests to me that areas that or people who are poorer or further down the scale—or however they are described—should be pulled up nearer the areas or people at the top. That is a real emphasis on need. However, from some of the answers that you have given to Ms Smith and others, there seems to be the idea of a geographic spread of the money that goes out. I wonder whether those two things are compatible. Some people would have expected all the money to go to really needy areas and no money to go to Aberdeenshire, despite the fact that Aberdeenshire might have some pockets of deprivation. How do you square those things?