Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 1555 contributions
|
Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)
Parliamentary Procedures and Practices
Meeting date: 22 September 2022
Rona Mackay
It is not an exaggeration to say that the Covid pandemic has changed all of our lives for ever. We had no choice but to make changes to our lives while restrictions were put in place to keep us safe. Working at home where possible was the key to keeping businesses going, and people adapted well to that—so well, in fact, that many employers have changed their business model to accommodate it. Like everything else, there are negatives as well as positives, but at least now there is choice.
Out of necessity, and not before time, we are looking at family-friendly options, a better work-life balance and doing business differently. As we have heard, the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee took time to strike a balance when it came to adapting the working practices of the Parliament. With an eye on the future, the committee decided that the pandemic had been a watershed and that it was an opportune time to examine practices that had been in place since the Parliament began in 1999.
All praise must go to the Parliament authorities, which reacted quickly to introduce a remote voting system to enable normal business to continue while most staff were working from home. There were teething problems but those were, largely, overcome as time went on.
The report shows that there was a variety of views and opinions when it came to deciding whether hybrid meetings should continue. That is hardly surprising in a place that is full of opinionated politicians. The majority view had to prevail, which was to seize the opportunity for greater flexibility and to become more accessible and inclusive to encourage diversity. Hybrid voting allows members with caring responsibilities and those who are ill to fulfil their duties, and it takes into account unforeseen family emergencies and travel difficulties.
As my colleague Collette Stevenson has already highlighted from the committee report, it is important to note that, according to the evidence that the committee took, in comparison to other legislatures,
“the Scottish Parliament introduced more measures”
to allow important business and scrutiny to continue, which I welcome.
Proxy voting was another important focus for the committee. As we have heard, it would be the subject of a fully evaluated pilot before any permanent change to the Parliament’s rules and procedures were made. I look forward to hearing more about that. It would be an important development, and I hope that it comes to fruition.
I am fully supportive of the proposals in the committee’s excellent report, which strike a sensible and realistic balance. However, the hybrid platform does not and should not replicate in-person participation in parliamentary business. There is no doubt that having fewer interventions, which are not yet possible in the remote system, reduces the quality of debate, and members who participate remotely can feel isolated and lose out on the atmosphere of a debate.
Committee work in Parliament is crucial for making legislation, conducting inquiries and scrutinising Government on the issues that keep Scotland running. Remote participation can be limiting for members and for witnesses who give evidence, and it should always be a last resort. However, the committee notes
“the Conveners Group support for the production of guidance to accompany the formalisation of long-term hybrid capability for committees and suggests that the Guidance on Committees be updated.”
That is eminently sensible.
Most importantly, MSPs were elected to represent their constituents in Scotland’s Parliament and it is vital that we do just that. As the report notes,
“unless exceptional or urgent, constituency work and interparliamentary business should be undertaken on non-sitting days.”
We should be here. The default position is that parliamentarians should be at their place of work on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, allowing time in constituencies on Mondays and Fridays. The public deserve nothing less. Technology has given us options, which I welcome. The report sets out the way ahead.
16:40Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
Jamie Greene is right. This is exactly the sort of issue that we would have drilled into in the previous Justice Sub-Committee on Policing. We definitely need to set aside some time to try to get answers.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
I want to put on record my delight that the not proven verdict will be abolished, as we heard yesterday. That is good news for victims, particularly of sexual crimes. It is a historic and radical change, but one that is long overdue.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
The response basically tells us what we already knew, so I am not sure that it is helpful. What we were asking was whether the framework is the correct one. We were not saying that the national health service should not be involved; there needs to be more connections on a number of issues. The response is quite short and it basically tells us what we already know. It would be good to probe a wee bit further into how the arrangements could work better.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
It does not need to be a full morning session but we could get people together for even just an hour or an hour and a half to see what the issues are from their side and what the process is now. We could follow up what was said with the cabinet secretary.
I am just putting that suggestion out there. I agree with your initial plan to write a letter.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
Can we also follow up Collette Stevenson’s suggestion, to find out how the pilot in Dundee is going?
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
On the proposed visit to Stop It Now! Scotland, will you give me some clarity by reminding me what that organisation does? I have in my head that it is about the rehabilitation of paedophiles and abusers.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
Are we talking about things such as online abuse?
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
Yes. I just wanted clarification. Thank you.
Criminal Justice Committee
Correspondence
Meeting date: 7 September 2022
Rona Mackay
I agree with your suggestion, convener, that we write to the CMO, and with Jamie Greene’s point that it is a health board issue. Depending on the response from that correspondence, if we have time on our schedule, would it be possible to have a round-table session with health board representatives, the Scottish Prison Service and others to discuss the matter? Sometimes, more gets done if we have a face-to-face conversation. There is clearly an issue. We hear about it a lot and the Wise Group has concerns about it. I am not sure whether that is a practical suggestion but it might move things on a bit more than just correspondence.
