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 4060 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Of course, the developers—who are less than enthusiastic about the levy—still do not think that that is late enough, as you will probably be aware.
The collection costs of the levy will be paid back, but has there been any downward pressure on the initial set-up costs, or are those still at the £3.7 million figure that we were led to believe they would be?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I appreciate your diplomatic use of word “slightly” there.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
When we took evidence from the developers—we took evidence from two panels, neither of which was particularly enthusiastic—one supported the levy and others did not. Another concern that was raised was the fact that the levy is to be imposed on developers, some of whom have had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with cladding, whereas people who were directly involved in cladding, such as the designers, architects or manufacturers—some of whom might not be in the country—are not being expected to pay. Frankly, there is a real sense of bitterness among some of the developers, who are asking why they should have to pay for someone else’s mistakes when the people who actually made those mistakes are not being expected to pay anything. That is a major issue with the levy.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Yes, it does. I will not go down a rabbit hole and ask a lot more questions on that topic, because of time constraints and other issues that I want to cover. However, that was informative.
On issues arising from last year’s evidence session, we talked about user satisfaction being 76 per cent. On that rating, Elaine, you said:
“We think that it is good, but it is not good enough.—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 19 November 2024; c 41.]
What is the position on user satisfaction now?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I could only work from home if there was no chocolate or there were no crisps in the house and there was a lock on the fridge to which I did not have the key.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
That concludes questions in our annual governance evidence session with Revenue Scotland. Would the witnesses like to make any further points before we conclude this part of our deliberations?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you. I will not say goodbye just yet, because you are about to take part in the next session. These are really important sessions and they are very interesting for the committee in seeing how Revenue Scotland is progressing.
10:38 Meeting suspended.Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
I will add something and then Mr Lindsay can comment. You talked about ensuring that the tax works. What do you mean by that? In the previous evidence session, John Mason touched on the point that Revenue Scotland is very proud of the fact that less than 1 per cent of tax revenue is used for administration, but I do not think that anybody thinks that that will be the case for the building safety levy. We are talking about administration costs of £300,000 for a tax take of, we hope, about £30 million. What do you mean when you talk about a tax working? Money can be collected, but where do efficiency, effectiveness and acceptability fit in, Mr Lindsay?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
In paragraph 1.4 of your submission, you said:
“Revenue Scotland has and continues to give advice, support, and assistance to the Scottish Government in relation to the practical impact on the administration of the tax regime contemplated by this Bill.”
Do you have concerns about some of the practicalities of the introduction of the bill, as was suggested in the submission?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 18 November 2025
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you very much. I have hogged enough of your time and colleagues are keen to come in.