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 868 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
So, there is no fee incurred for keeping a register up to date.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
It is on the creditors and the debtors, as it were—the person who has made the pledge—to keep track of it. Is that correct?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
Do we not have any concerns about the fact that a debtor’s information is publicly available in that way? In fact, if I understand correctly, that is the point of having the registers.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
Uploads are checked, but if I find out that my information is in a scanned document or something else that got through the check, is there a method by which I can request that that information be corrected or redacted, given that I am not one of the two parties that can do the corrections?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
We have talked a little bit about information accuracy for the creditor and the debtor. My question is about third parties. Other documents might have been uploaded as evidence for the asset that is being pledged—for example, invoices, which might include customer or individual information. On the point about customer databases being proof of the value of the asset, how does personal information get redacted from that supporting information? It is not about the creditor or the debtor, but the fact that you have all those customers is evidence of the asset. How is the privacy around that information assured, and how can that information be appropriately redacted?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 January 2025
Lorna Slater
Thank you.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 22 January 2025
Lorna Slater
Thank you, convener.
I note what was said earlier about sharing best practice, and I am really interested to hear specifically about the lessons that have been learned from the existing deals. Many of them are now quite mature, so the committee has been talking about what another tranche of deals would look like. Overall, it seems that quite a lot of positive has come from those deals, but if we were to do this again—if we decided that it is worth while for multiple levels of Government and industry to work together to create such deals—what would you do differently and what would be the same? Is it worth doing again? What lessons have been learned? What would we keep and what would we change for next time?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Lorna Slater
I wondered whether now is a good time for me to ask my question because it follows on from yours, convener. Is that all right?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Lorna Slater
Okay. Thank you very much. I challenge some of those points. The project was not brought forward by the grass roots—it was brought forward by Transport Scotland—and it has not been possible to reassess it because of the structure of the deal. However, I appreciate the answer.
On a more positive note, I suppose, I think that the secretary of state will acknowledge that the newer deals seem to be a bit more grass roots and focus more on innovation and sustainability. What next? Will there be a new tranche of city region deals? What should those look like?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 15 January 2025
Lorna Slater
I want to thank you very much for coming this morning, secretary of state. Your predecessor did not accept invitations to give evidence to this Parliament, and we are delighted that you have.
The committee has taken substantial evidence on the benefits of collaborative long-term working between levels of government and industry, which some of these deals have supported. Many of the projects have been grass roots-led and prioritise sustainability and innovation. However, that is not true for all the projects. In the older regional deals, there are some dinosaur road and car-based projects initiated by Transport Scotland, of which the Sheriffhall roundabout—which I know the secretary of state will be familiar with—is the one with which I am most familiar. My question is on the same theme as that pursued by Jamie Halcro Johnston. It appears that Transport Scotland could not get that project prioritised or funded through normal means, so it has turned to the deal. However, it is a bit of a dinosaur. It was proposed before any Government in the UK had declared a climate emergency and before the Scottish Government had set a target to reduce car kilometres by 20 per cent, and there is a grass-roots local campaign against it.
The project is stuck. It is demonstrably not being built, but if you ask any level of government why we cannot reprioritise the funds or change up the project, the answer is always because it is part of the region deal and down to “that Government”, with everyone pointing fingers, which means that we cannot change anything. The question is how Governments can, with democratic mandates that change over time, adjust these longer projects to align with current priorities. It just feels like hands are tied.
10:00