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 3539 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 11 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
Amendment 6, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 7 and 13.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 11 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
No member has indicated that they wish to come in. I invite the minister to wind up.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 11 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
I invite the minister to wind up.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 11 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
Amendment 21, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 22, 31 and 23 to 25.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
We have talked a lot about scrutiny. One of the issues that we have not talked about directly is sunset clauses. It has been suggested that post-implementation reviews should be carried out, along with periodic reviews, to assess whether the office holder is still relevant and required. That is not just about scrutiny on a day-to-day basis; rather, it is about whether we still need a given commissioner. The post might have been set up with a bit of verve and passion and a desire to get things done, but after 10 or 20 years鈥攑erhaps even after five years鈥攖he office might seem to be just plodding along. What is the end game for commissioners? It seems that once they are established they are with us permanently; that seems to be the situation so far. If that is not the case, sunset clauses could be brought in for new commissioners, but what about existing commissioners? Will there be any reviews to look at whether they should continue indefinitely?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
Indeed.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
No, but where should the SPCB fit in?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
I mean enhancements of how the scrutiny of commissioners function is undertaken.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
I am getting the feeling that you are of the view that the Government does not have a lot to say on this. What is the Government鈥檚 overall role in relation to commissioners? You talked about the ones that the Government is proposing, but, as for others, you said in your opening statement that that is up to the Parliament. Do you feel that the Government should have no role in that, even to encourage or discourage?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Kenneth Gibson
Let us say that someone comes forward with a suggestion for a commissioner for older people, for example, which has been suggested, as I have mentioned, and they refer to the fact that we do not have a minister for older people or even a ministerial title that includes older people. In other words, they feel that older people are not getting the attention that they deserve. Does the Government look at that and say that there is an issue and a gap to be closed? What is the Government鈥檚 response to that?
I am not asking whether it will agree or disagree with a proposal for a specific commissioner. I want to know what the Government does in looking at the reasons for a commissioner being proposed in a specific area. Does it think that it needs to do something about that, because something is not transpiring in the way that it should be, which is creating enough momentum for people to drive forward with such a suggestion?