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 ˿ and committees will automatically update to show only the ˿ and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of ˿ and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of ˿ 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 3527 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
The joint submission that you sent to the committee supports the removal of the not proven verdict. Professor Leverick, what does the Scottish jury research tell us about the use and impact of that particular verdict?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
That is very helpful in setting out the context and the reality of the limitations that you faced in your research.
Can I tease out a little bit more about the strengths of the process that you engaged in while running what was obviously a big piece of work?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
Professor Leverick, I want to pick up on the point that you made earlier about the potential for not proven to be used almost as a compromise verdict. That is linked to the issue of public confidence.
In your submission, you have a section headed
“Arguments against the retention of the not proven verdict”.
You say that the first argument is around stigma—we can maybe come to that. You go on to say:
“The second argument is that it risks a loss of public confidence in the criminal justice system, as it allows jurors to use it as a compromise verdict to bring deliberations to an end rather than engaging in more rigorous discussions. There is empirical evidence from the Scottish Jury Research that the verdict operates in precisely this way, with participants using it to bring deliberations to a premature end.”
How important is the issue of public confidence in the deliberations? What are your observations in and around that, in particular from the research that you have done?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
Professor Leverick, I want to pick up on the point that you made about sexual offences. In your submission, you said:
“There was also evidence that this use”—
that is, the use of not proven—
“was ‘read into’ the verdict outcome by sexual offence complainers, undermining their belief that jurors discharged the weighty responsibility placed upon them with appropriate diligence.”
That is quite powerful commentary.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
I see that John Swinney and Sharon Dowey want to come back in.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
John Swinney wants to come in with a supplementary.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
In terms of the existing FAI process, as compared with—
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
That concludes our business in public. Next week, we will begin phase 2 of our scrutiny of the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. We will take evidence on part 4, which is the part of the bill that deals with the proposed abolition of the not proven verdict and changes to jury majorities.
10:32 Meeting continued in private until 13:09.Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
Our next agenda item is a review of the correspondence received on the implementation of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018. Members will recall that the committee undertook a short post-legislative review of the 2018 act and has been following up issues with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs.
The clerk’s note in paper 2 sets out the details of that and the cabinet secretary’s most recent reply. Do members have any comments?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 November 2023
Audrey Nicoll
Can I clarify that? Are you referring to the first recommendation on the establishment of an independent process?