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 1249 contributions
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 30 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
I appreciate the question, Mr Fraser, and your diligence in answering it, Ms Vestri, but I am concerned that were slightly going beyond the remit of the committee—
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 30 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
In that space, would you like to say more about the point that I touched on in my initial questions about accessibility and the ease with which members of the public can approach you and access your services? Lorna Slater asked our previous witness about that.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 30 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
Okay. Thank you very much.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
It is helpful feedback.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
You are obviously far more experienced in those matters than I am but, based on what you have said and what we heard last week, I wonder whether there is a compromise position. For example, could there be an opportunity for defence solicitors to examine the item or to make a decision within three months of the date of charge, before the physical item is destroyed and photographs are used instead? Do we need to give further consideration to that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
My question is on part 1, and concerns digital productions, which we did not get to earlier.
At last week’s meeting, we discussed with witnesses whether, in situations in which an image is used in evidence instead of a physical item, that item will be retained to allow the defence to access it and whether it would be retained until the case is concluded and any appeal is dealt with. Do you have a view on that matter?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
As well as thinking about funding, my request to you is that you help us to think about time. You do not necessarily need to do this today, but as we move forward in the bill process, it would be useful for the committee to know whether you can give a more definitive position on what a reasonable timeframe for commencement would be.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
It sounds as though, rather than struggling to be able to deliver it, you would not be able to do so.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
Thank you very much, all of you. That was really helpful for our evidence taking.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Ben Macpherson
I have two questions to follow up on some of the points that have been raised by colleagues. First, it is important to note that the points that Sharon Dowey raised about police officer time also apply to expert witness time. It is important for us to keep in mind that other initiatives are on-going to have the Crown and the defence agree more evidence in advance to reduce the necessity for police officers and other witnesses to attend court.
I see nodding heads, so I presume that that is taken as read, but it is important to acknowledge that for our wider consideration and for the record.