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 łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees will automatically update to show only the łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of łÉČËżěĘÖ and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of łÉČËżěĘÖ 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 1769 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Have any of the post-1992 universities given an explanation? The SFC said that the reduction was a result of the universities not filling all their places. Have any of those universities explained why that might have been the case?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I appreciate that. I ask the same question of Professor Gillespie. [Interruption.]
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Okay. I am not sure that that is what those organisations have said in the representations that they have made to us. In its submission, Universities Scotland said:
“The SQA places have been removed from the system in a different pattern to the way they were allocated in 2020 and 2021, meaning that some institutions”—
the post-1992 institutions—
“were more negatively impacted than others.”
What is your response to that?
11:30Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I found that exchange really helpful—thank you. Some of my questions have already been answered, so I will put just one question. What are your expectations of colleges with regard to voluntary severance?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Have all colleges that have put such schemes in place sought that approval?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
May I come in?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 12 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans said that the outcome agreement “includes ... requirements” on colleges to get
“approvals for voluntary severance schemes”
from the SFC. Is that the case?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 5 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Have you noticed any impact on widening access and on the experience of students from the poorest backgrounds?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 5 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I want to ask specifically about the student support budget, if that is okay. It looks as though that has dropped by about ÂŁ12 million, and the justification for that from the Scottish Funding Council is that demand has dropped and that
“the allocation for each college will cover at least what was spent last year”.
Is that the experience of your members, David Belsey? Is that what they are telling you? Do students need less support now?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 5 June 2024
Pam Duncan-Glancy
No—it was very helpful. We could find out more about the issue that you have just highlighted from the Government.
The post-1992 universities are particularly well known for their work on widening access. In your submission, however, you say that the budget concerns could put that at risk. The Government has said that that will not happen, but its own equality impact assessment says that it could, so there is quite a bit of confusion in that respect. What is your position on the issue?