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 764 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
I think that this has been covered, in a sense, but I am interested in this gap that has been mentioned. Is one of the issues that a foundation apprenticeship is a bit of a commitment and work experience is no commitment at all? Do we need to have something in between? Do we need a bit more structure to work experience—say, a degree of certification—while at the same time ensuring that we do not necessarily have something that involves the same commitment as a full-time course that lasts the whole of an academic year? Is that what we are vaguely reaching towards in this discussion? In Manchester, for example, they have skills boot camps. Could we be looking at those kinds of more structured but shorter-term models and opportunities for young people?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
That is interesting.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
Are there any other structural elements, such as the format of learning? How should we break down the problem in order to address the reskilling issue?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
I have a brief supplementary question. I want to break what has been said apart a little bit, and I will explain why. A few weeks ago, I spoke to a decorator apprentice who had started when he was 30. There is a structural problem, which you alluded to, in relation to funding and the format of learning, but that apprentice said that he had also found there to be a cultural issue in that everyone treats the apprentices as young lads, but he is not a young lad.
Do you agree that there are multiple strands? As well as the issues with structure and the format of learning, there might be some cultural elements. Are there any other strands to the reskilling challenge? It is really important that we pull apart all the details of what that challenge looks like.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
I will leave that there, convener, unless anyone else on the panel wants to respond.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
I find that interesting, because I think sometimes we treat skills as an alternative to academic things. From what you have just described, it is just a different blend of academic subjects, relative to the other things that you should be learning at school. Is that a fair summary?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 23 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
As an add-on—I know that this is a mild tangent, but I do not know where else I would throw this question in—do we also need to tease apart, a little bit, the technical and the vocational sides of things? I think that, sometimes, we say that something is either academic or skills based, and there is also a difference between practical hands-on learning and the applied theoretical side, which is technical. In other countries, they keep those three categories quite distinct. Is that something else that we need to think about? Do we need to make sure that, at school level, we are providing opportunities across those three areas, not taking some binary approach that sees just academic subjects and skills-based subjects?
Stevie, you seem to be nodding.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
That is true, but it is also about the content of what providers are providing, with that happening on an employer-by-employer basis. Employers could guarantee the places, but they could buy into a more, in essence, on-the-shelf system, rather than there being bespoke learning. Would that simplify the system?
I will let you answer that, and then I will ask a follow-up question.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
I will ask Ian Hughes the same question. We can all appreciate that, if someone has been trained in one trade on a construction site, they are not starting from square 1. Do you take the view that, if you want to train people who already have some work experience, there are bypasses and you can accredit previous experience? What do the different routes that you outlined look like? How can we make the system more efficient?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 April 2025
Daniel Johnson
You are making the point that we need to top up the apprenticeship model, not take away from it.