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 成人快手 and committees will automatically update to show only the 成人快手 and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of 成人快手 and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of 成人快手 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 925 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
I understand that completely. My question is in relation to the bill, which does not, as far as I am aware, restrict itself strictly to blockchain technology and therefore also covers items that would be in a permissive ledger or some other record-keeping mechanism, provided that changes are tracked. I understand that blockchain technology is rigidly immutable in that way, but other technologies that would be covered by the bill are not. Is it an issue that the scope of the bill is broader than just the particular type of technology that includes blockchain and crypto?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
I am interested in hearing from Mr Ferry and Mr Gray, but my understanding is slightly different. The original question was about the bill not dealing with tokenisation directly and whether you think that that is an issue. My understanding is that the bill seeks to give legal reality to something that currently does not have it鈥攁 digital asset. Given that tokens can represent digital assets or physical assets, tokenisation is kind of by the by, and I am not clear why legislation would be required on that. It sounds as if the current system works fine but people need to sign up to it. As I understand it, the bill is about establishing digital assets in law, but I might have misunderstood. Perhaps you can clarify.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
Given that the bill is what we have in front of us, is your recommendation that, although there are other approaches, its approach is adequate, or is your suggestion that we need to go back and change the definition?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
That is useful.
I will move to my second question, which touches on tokenisation. Tokenisation is a key growth area in the sector, but it is not mentioned directly in the bill. We have heard a lot of evidence on how tokenisation is used in conjunction with digital assets, and on how it can be used in conjunction with normal assets鈥攑hysical things that we are all used to dealing with.
What are the legal barriers to the development in Scotland of tokenisation that could be addressed in the bill? Is there something that is being missed that we should be looking at?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
That is really helpful. If I have understood you correctly, the bill is not the place to include that aspect, but we need to come back to it鈥攁nd fairly urgently, because it sounds as though that is needed.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
With regard to the legislation in front of us, are you suggesting that we should add something?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
Sorry, Professor Buchanan鈥擨 was signalling to the convener. Please carry on.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
I am hearing a description of how a particular digital asset technology operates. However, the bill seeks to incorporate other types of digital asset technology that use a different type of accounting mechanism. It is not a distributed or automated mechanism; it might be a permission system or something else. Are you suggesting that the bill should restrict itself to only those distributive systems and not cover other types of digital assets? The intention of the bill is to include a broader type of asset class, whether or not you consider those asset classes to be secure or to have secure audit trails and so on. The question is whether the law should recognise those as digital assets in the first place.
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
That is really helpful. In my next question, I will go back to the issue of tokenisation, but with a slightly different approach. Tokenisation is a key growth area in the sector, but not all digital assets are represented by tokens. They are a particular manifestation of a way to show ownership of an asset. There are at least two questions there. Is it a problem that tokenisation is not mentioned in the bill? Is the bill sufficiently broad to allow the expansion of tokenisation鈥擯rofessor Buchanan said that tokens could come to represent physical assets and that they could be implemented differently鈥攁s well as other innovations that come up? Is the bill sufficiently future proofed?
Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 3 December 2025
Lorna Slater
It is not clear to me that legislation is required in order to be able to do that. The bill is one step down. We all get that a plane ticket or the register of cars can be tokenised, in theory, but we want to be able to recognise digital assets as assets for the purpose of the law. Some of those assets might be represented as tokens and some might not, but that is where the bill sits. Is that your understanding?