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 1673 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Thank you.
Moving on to the proposed sex crimes court, the Faculty of Advocates has told us that
“there is no single feature of the proposed court which could not be delivered rapidly”,
and the Law Society of Scotland has said that the establishment of a specialist division in the existing courts would be—I am paraphrasing—quicker, cheaper and as effective as the proposed new court. When I put that to Lady Dorrian a couple of weeks ago, she said that we need to
“seize the opportunity to create the culture change from the ground up”.—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 10 January 2024; c 22.]
She said that if we fail to do so, that will result in us having the same conversations in 40 years’ time. I do not want to put any of you in the position of murmuring a judge, but are you persuaded by the Lord Justice Clerk’s argument on that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Earlier, we heard from the academics that there is a significant lack of research in Scotland on a lot of these matters. Professor Cheryl Thomas’s view is that the juryless rape trials would therefore be, at best, premature. Those who support the measures, including Lady Dorrian, say that the pilot will allow for the collection of evidence. The academic in turn responds and asks how, without any existing evidence or research, we can measure what we are trying to measure with the new body of evidence that will be yielded from the pilot.
Do you think that we should get more evidence? I know that John Swinney said earlier that it is not unusual to hear a call for more evidence, but it seems particularly important in this case, given the radical changes that are being proposed and the significant lack of evidence that exists. Do you think that much more evidence should be collected before we embark on this?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Do you favour a different approach?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
I assume that you would rather get rid of the not proven verdict, on that basis.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Often, the Crown does not object to such applications, so the victim is left with no voice.
I think that you also support an extension of the proposed timescale in the bill, from 21 to 28 days.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Can I ask a very quick question about judges, convener?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
First, I thank you all for all the work that you have been doing, and for waiving your anonymity, which cannot have been easy.
The evidence that we have heard so far has been really compelling, and so many things that you have said jump out: being treated as an outsider in the court; being treated as a bit of evidence; and being alone and scared. I note what Ellie said about how the defence lawyers often conduct themselves and how the court is an environment in which individuals can act with impunity.
I have a lot of questions. One issue that we have not touched on so far relates to the proposed new sexual offences courts and the proposal that there should be a pilot of judge-only rape trials without juries.
Do you have any views on whether, in your circumstances, you would have preferred a non-jury trial, or were you satisfied with that aspect? Was the presence of a jury almost a counter to the legal establishment that dictated the rest of the proceedings?
Any one of you can answer.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
Thank you. I am mindful that other members want to come in.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
I wonder whether that goes back to some of the evidence that you gave us previously about data.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Russell Findlay
I have a question on part 6, if I have time, convener. [Interruption.] I will take that as a yes.
My question is about the invocation of section 275 in the 1995 act, and the requirement for independent legal representation in that situation, which is in the bill. Serious concerns have been raised by the Crown, the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, the judges and the Law Society of Scotland about that provision leading to additional churn and delay and further trauma for complainers. However, a new element has been raised today by some of the witnesses we heard from earlier, which is about cases in which character or sexual history information is introduced in effect by stealth by defence lawyers without making a section 275 application. How widespread might that be? Does the bill need to address that particular blind spot or loophole, or whatever you want to call it?