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 3618 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::I am drawing my questions to a close and am interested in how the review will lead into a public inquiry or something else. Could that sort of truth project stand alone? Would it be worth while doing that, or is it better, as was done down south, to have it relate to or be under the aegis of a public inquiry?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::I will follow on with the same theme, although I do not want to flog it unnecessarily. We were given figures by the Scottish Parliament information centre that come from the national audit in England and Wales last summer. The national audit says:
“500,000 children a year are likely to experience child sexual abuse … Police recorded crime data shows just over 100,000 offences of child sexual abuse and exploitation … in 2024”.
It goes on to say that,
“Of these contact offences, an estimated 17,100 are ‘flagged’ by police as child sexual exploitation”,
and that, within that,
“The only figure on group-based child sexual exploitation”
is
“around 700”.
That suggests, on the surface, that group-based child sexual exploitation is a tiny part of what is going on overall. If that is the case, does that mean that we should not focus on it too much? Alternatively, is the answer either that we do not know what the figures are or that we suspect that the group-based side is much bigger than what has been recorded in the national audit?
10:15
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::As I understand it, you folk are currently carrying out a review and that will lead to whether or not we have a public inquiry. I do not want to go into the timescale of 18 months, because I think that one of my colleagues is going to ask you about that. However, is one of the review’s aims to enable you to get a better feel for the size of the problem, which will help you to recommend, or the Government to decide, whether there should be a public inquiry? Is that the route that we are going down?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::You sound enthusiastic about that and you have enthused me. That project fed into your public inquiry.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::Would people trust a public inquiry, or is that too formal a setting?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::Perhaps I should know more about the truth project, but I do not. Was it like a public inquiry, with lawyers on both sides?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::I realise that I have not asked anyone else. Does anyone want to come in before I hand back to the convener?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 25 February 2026
John Mason
::If survivors are not currently coming forward, and given that you do not sound optimistic that they will come forward during the review—correct me if I have picked that up wrongly—would they be more likely to come forward in a public inquiry, or could we go through the whole process and still have a lot of victims not telling us?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
John Mason
::My question is aimed at those either from COSLA, the health side, or both, because it is about IJBs, which were mentioned earlier. Are they a bad example of public sector reform? It seems to me that we started with two sides, health and local government, that we wanted to be more joined up but that we have ended up with three bodies. We have IJBs and health and social care partnerships as well. The Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill is going through the Parliament at the moment and now, instead of having two organisations involved in service planning for children, we are looking at having three. Has that saved any money or has it cost more? Is that a good example?
I will raise another issue. The committee on the whole seems to be enthusiastic about zero-based budgeting, but I am sceptical.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 February 2026
John Mason
::The convener and I clearly do not agree about this, so maybe somebody who is enthusiastic about zero-based budgeting could persuade me.