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 3649 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
I point out that, in evidence to us, the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers said:
“The financial memorandum does not represent the outcome of the Feeley review or the national care service consultation. You cannot see the total costs. You are not able to look at what the priorities would be within them or to properly compare alternative models against what is laid out in that financial memorandum.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 25 October 2022; c 33-4.]
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
One of the things that came out of the evidence is the potential impact on the viability of local authorities as an unintended consequence. The ultimate aim of the policy is to deliver for the people who require the service. If there is a conflict between the viability of a local authority and delivering the service, where would we be?
Some local authorities have smaller management teams than others, and those teams have a wide range of roles. If expertise is transferred—potentially for very good reasons—that local authority might not be able to deliver on other areas of its services. How much time has been spent looking at that issue?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
The issue is not about funding having a neutral impact. If a management team is reduced, it will have a difficulty in delivering those services. It might be that some local authorities must retain similar-sized management teams. You would end up with diseconomies of scale. If you transfer some services but, ultimately, you need to leave much the same team behind, you must fund additional staff for the new services. You would surely end up with a more costly and, some might think, more cumbersome delivery.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
I am aware of that, and I have also noticed that you are being very careful with your language, in saying that you will “take account” of inflation and look at its prevailing rate. I understand that you are not in charge of the budget, but huge sums of money will be dedicated to setting up the structure of the service, and those who will be in receipt of that money will be looking to see whether it will be hobbled from the start.
Given that this is a flagship policy for the Government, one would have thought that ensuring that it delivered, even against the financial odds that we are currently facing, would be an absolute priority. It alarms me somewhat that, even at this stage, there seems to be no guarantee that that will be the case.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
I would appreciate that, minister, but I know that other members, including me and Daniel Johnson, want to ask about co-design. We will be exploring the issue further as the meeting progresses.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 8 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
The last question is the $64,000 question from some of the people who have given evidence to us, and it refers directly to the financial memorandum. SOLACE said that a lot of the Scottish Government’s response to its concerns has been
“to say either, ‘We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,’ or, ‘That’s a decision that can be taken locally.’”
It went on to say that
“the proposal is well intentioned, but it does not give us any certainty that we are going to get to something that will deliver consistent care services across Scotland.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 25 October 2022; c 42.]
COSLA said that, in its view, the financial memorandum delivers
“an unacceptable lack of clarity.”
When I asked COSLA, CIPFA and SOLACE whether they thought that the financial memorandum should be revisited, each of them said yes. What is your response to that?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 1 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
You were asked:
“If applicable, do you believe your comments on the financial assumptions have been accurately reflected in the financial memorandum”?
I found it interesting that you basically said that you did not believe that they had been. However, the Fraser of Allander Institute took the view that the
“analysis provided by the Scottish Government is reasoned and logical.”
Will Emma Congreve explain the institute’s thinking on that?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 1 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you for that. You say in your submission:
“what could be the most significant”—
that great word again—
“public sector organisational change in recent memory must not be underestimated in both time, unnecessary distractions and increased costs.”
What do you mean by “unnecessary distractions”?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 1 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
Thank you.
Emma, I found the Fraser of Allander Institute’s analysis quite interesting with regard to table 3 in its submission. You say:
“Decisions relating to the number of Care Boards have not yet been made, and the figures in Table 3 assume 32 are created, one for each local authority area.”
Does it seem efficient to you to go from 32 local authorities to 32 care boards? What impact would that have on delivering what the bill is ultimately setting out to do, which is to ensure high and consistent quality of care across Scotland?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 1 November 2022
Kenneth Gibson
Do you have a view on that, Mark?