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 1555 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
Well, you could raise the percentage.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
I will turn to part 3, on physical non-attendance and the sanctions for that. Why do you think that legislation is necessary in that regard, rather than using the MSP code of conduct? Do you feel that the code of conduct would not be strong enough or is not working?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
Okay, but, generally, would this committee be involved—
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
I have a small supplementary question on regional recall. I think that I know how you will answer this, but I would like you to put it on the record.
As I understand it, the Welsh threshold for recall is 10 per cent of the voters across the region, and then it goes to the next person on the list. That is straightforward. I think that I know what you are going to say, but I just want you to put it on the record. Why did you not choose that system?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
We have heard concerns that the requirement might disadvantage members of underrepresented groups or people with certain responsibilities, such as caring responsibilities—mostly women. Do you accept that, or do you stand by your earlier point that you think that they should make the effort to come in?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
How would the actual counting of when someone was in be done? Who would be responsible for monitoring that?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
—-and still have the simpler system of going to the next person on the list.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
Before I ask my set of questions, I want to pick up on Annie Wells’s line of questioning. When you were talking about postal votes, I had a random thought. Did you, or would you, consider making the process entirely postal, given that that would cut a lot of costs and that this would be a departure from the norm anyway?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
It would address the question of privacy, which you mentioned, and it would cut costs.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 June 2025
Rona Mackay
How did you arrive at the 180-day mark? Was there any reason for that? Or did you just think that that was a good balance?