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 1297 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
You want there to be a higher threshold. Even if people who have committed such serious offences do not plead guilty in advance, would there not be more evidence in those cases to get a guilty verdict?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
So, there needs to be more detail on how it would work.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
Should the register have only the top 3 per cent of offenders in it, or should it be opened up to more people? I thought that you were suggesting in your submission that you wanted the register to include more people.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
If you had more detail on how the proposed system would fit in with the current structures, do you think that it could be beneficial?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
I want to ask about the reporting requirements under section 1, on which there are differing opinions. In its submission, COPFS said that restricting the definition of people who would be on the register to those who had been sentenced to
“12 months or more in prison or … a community payback order … is potentially confusing and is inconsistent with the importance placed by criminal justice agencies and third sector organisations in Scotland of a consistent definition of domestic abuse.”
However, would the bill not mean that being put on the register would become a deterrent to somebody who had a lesser charge—perhaps somebody who was a first offender? COPFS said that it wants more people to be involved, but that might lead to more bureaucracy, whereas the bill is intended for high-level offenders.
Meanwhile, the Law Society said:
“We consider that the proposed provisions in Part 1 could create a real risk of labelling people as inherently dangerous … In our view, a higher threshold for registration would produce a more meaningful register”.
Should the bill ensure that only those who pose a higher level of risk would go on the register, as opposed to what it proposes at the moment?
Finally, Police Scotland said:
“On review of Part 1 to the bill, we are not of the opinion that the significant investment of budget and resources needed to meet its requirements are proportionate”.
If you had the resources required, would what is proposed in the bill fill a gap in the system, with the result that you would be more supportive of the bill?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
Yes—thank you.
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
You covered some of this in your responses to Rona Mackay, but do you have any comments on the financial and resource aspects of the bill that you have not already raised?
On 25 June, we heard from Pam Gosal MSP that the “maximum cost” of the bill would be £23 million but that the investment would be worth making because it would achieve an estimated £7 billion in savings by reducing domestic abuse offending costs. Is £23 million a realistic figure? Should other things be considered in the financial memorandum? Do you have any other comments?
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
I am sure that a lot of organisations would make good use of it. However, comments were made about whether a specialist person coming in and delivering education rather than a schoolteacher would be preferable. Are such costs addressed? Do we need to put more funding in, given the potential savings? We heard that the bill’s provisions would cost £23 million but that £7 billion would be saved by reducing domestic abuse reoffending.
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
I have one final question. Earlier, you said that colleagues in the public sector had concerns about the amount of bureaucracy involved. Could that be addressed by extra funding? Could you tell us concisely what the public sector concerns were and who they came from?
Criminal Justice Committee 3 December 2025 [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Sharon Dowey
That is fine.
I have a question about older firefighters and the fitness test. Is that a concern? I have heard reports that the fitness level for younger firefighters is the same as that for older ones and that, if the level was changed slightly, we might keep more people operational.