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 1653 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
Good morning, and welcome to the eighth meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in 2025. We have received apologies from Ruth Maguire, and I welcome Rona Mackay, who is attending as a committee substitute.
The first agenda item is a decision on whether to take in private agenda item 3, which will be a discussion of the evidence that we are going to hear today. Do members agree to take that item in private?
Members indicated agreement.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
I remind people—very early in this committee meeting—that I am conscious of the time.
To address the point that you have raised, Willie, about the separation between legislative scrutiny and inquiry scrutiny in other Parliaments, do you think that it would be possible for the same members to sit with two different hats on in two different committees? A committee could sit as a legislative committee, where there would be one view, but, separately and distinctly, it could sit as an inquiry committee. It could be the same people, in the same room and in the same slot, but a different role could be identified for the two meetings. Might that aid what you have talked about in relation to leaving hat, rosette and club at the door?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
That is a good answer. How about you, Ross?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
It is nice to lift the lid on the dark actions that happen behind the scenes. That will bring me to another issue, but, before I get to that, I will ask something else.
This committee inquiry does not look specifically at the distribution of committees and the choice that happens right at the start, but that is an interesting aspect. You mentioned education, Douglas. Willie, what is the most important committee from the Scottish Liberal Democrat point of view?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
That is good.
I want to go back to the topic of this particular set of questions, which is conveners and whether there would be any advantage in electing them. Very foolishly, I now seem to have two parts to my closed question, but I would like some closed answers to it.
The first part is simple: would a convener have additional value if they were elected by the chamber? I am not talking about altering how parties choose their conveners or the discussions that Douglas Ross referred to with regard to parties choosing committees; it would be about the mechanics of conveners being elected by the chamber rather than how they are chosen at the moment—I will just put the lid back down on the dark parts of that. Would such an approach give conveners enhanced value or enhanced power, and—this is now a three-part question—would it assist with the cohesion in a committee if its members and the convener knew that they were there because of an election that was open to the chamber, if I can use the word “chamber” for the moment?
Does anyone want to kick off with that instead of our constantly going along the line in the same direction? I see that everyone has put their heads down—this is like primary school.
09:45Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
I know that this sounds very rude, and I have no intention of being rude—
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
I welcome our second panel, on which we have Jamie Hepburn, the Minister for Parliamentary Business; Steven Macgregor, head of the parliament and legislation unit at the Scottish Government; and Ailsa Kemp, parliament and legislation unit team leader at the Scottish Government.
Thank you for your patience, minister. We will move straight to questions, so I will throw you in the shark pit and invite Rona Mackay to start.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
In essence, should there be more transparency around the witness list? In the light of what we have heard from Ross Greer and others on responsibility, should committee members be genuinely part of that decision making?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
Do you think that the vehicle of an election potentially allows individuals, as Ross Greer has indicated, to say how the committee is going to be run, both to allow themselves to take off the rosette and to set themselves the standards against which they would be tested if they were elected as convener?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 15 May 2025
Martin Whitfield
Certainly not.