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 3180 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
We have identified the need for follow-up instead of just having a one-day inquiry into an organisation’s performance before everyone moves on, and we are keen to work with you to ensure that we are regularly updated on progress that is being made.
We move to questions from Craig Hoy.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
Yes. I was going to say that we should build that issue into our work programme and return to it, because it is clearly a matter of concern and interest. Auditor General, is there a register of public bodies in Scotland that take part, or that do not take part, in the national fraud initiative?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
We are coming towards the end of the meeting. You talked about agility.
You have explained in your written report about the move towards blogs and briefings. In the past two decades, Audit Scotland has built up a powerful reputation for being authoritative and forensic, and for making evidence-led recommendations. How will you safeguard that reputation in a world of blogs and briefings? How do you see the mechanism for referring work to the committee working? Can you assure us that there will be ample opportunity for us to work with you and to scrutinise the issues that you uncover using those routes?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
I turn to the main item of business, which is a chance for us to consider Audit Scotland’s strategic priorities and future work programme. I welcome our witnesses. We have with us Stephen Boyle, who is the Auditor General for Scotland, and via videolink, Mark Roberts, who is audit director at Audit Scotland.
Before I move to questions from the committee, I thank Stephen Boyle for providing a written report and ask him to give us a short presentation to outline the strategic priorities of Audit Scotland and its future work programme.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
I think that some of us are maybe more concerned about whether people can access their general practitioner and what their sense of that service is, has been and might be in the future. I think Craig Hoy wants to come in with a brief question that is related to this area.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
On that note, I thank Stephen Boyle and Mark Roberts for their evidence this morning. It has been extremely illuminating and very helpful for us to understand your priorities and work programme, which will, in turn, feed into that of the committee. I thank you for your time.
10:15 Meeting continued in private until 10:43.Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
Surely not.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2021
Richard Leonard
Thank you.
Meeting of the Commission
Meeting date: 1 September 2021
Richard Leonard
One of the things that struck me from the report was on page 20, on internal and external quality assurance review. The conclusion that was drawn that
“only four of the 11 financial audits we reviewed achieved our target standard of quality. Of the remainder, three were graded ‘improvements required’ and four were graded ‘significant improvements required’”.
The commentary also refers to “mixed results”. Will you give us more details of those mixed results? What are the particular areas for improvement, what is their seriousness, and what is the work plan to address them?
Meeting of the Commission
Meeting date: 1 September 2021
Richard Leonard
I am sure that we will come back to that and keep an eye on it.
I am sorry to dwell more on the negative than on the positive, but the other area of the annual report that struck me was the section a couple of pages later that refers to professional training for audit and included the pass-rate statistics. In 2018-19, the pass rate was 85.7 per cent; in 2019-20 it was down to 84 per cent; in 2020-21 it had gone down to 79 per cent. I think there was a previous suggestion that the variation might have been due to the introduction of a new exam a couple of years ago. Why is the pattern like that? What are you doing to address it? Do you have insight into why the pattern has been going in that direction?