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 2212 contributions
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Graham Simpson
Yes, I get that. The figures show that there has been net migration to Scotland, but you have said in your paper that there has been a financial loss because of the tax difference.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Graham Simpson
Alyson Stafford, in response to Mr Beattie, you referred to a number of reports that were published in April last year. One of those was an HMRC paper, so it might be that HMRC should respond to this question—you can decide between you. The HMRC paper, which is called “Impacts of 2018 to 2019 Scottish Income Tax changes on intra-UK migration and labour market participation”—a nice short title—says:
“In total, we estimate a loss in NSND Income Tax”—
which means non-savings, non-dividend income tax—
“from cross-border migration of £60.6 million”.
In other words, ÂŁ60 million would have stayed in Scotland if tax bands had not changed. Is that correct?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Graham Simpson
I appreciate that.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Graham Simpson
Okay, but where you live is important. I am a bad example because I am an MSP, but if I was not an MSP and I moved to Carlisle, I would pay less tax. Where I live is important.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 26 March 2025
Graham Simpson
Okay. On 11 March, you wrote the committee a useful letter in which you addressed the issue of employers not applying S codes. We are talking about a small number of employers; in your letter, you mention that two employers are “consistently” getting this wrong. You obviously do not say who they are—and I am not asking you to name them, as you will not do that—but can you tell us what size those companies are? Why are they getting it wrong? You also refer to software in your letter. Are they now getting it right?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Graham Simpson
To be clear, is the minister saying that housing first is not defined in legislation? It seems to me that Mr Griffin is attempting to put some meat on the bones of how the housing first approach ought to operate in Scotland. Is the minister opposed to that?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Graham Simpson
I want to be clear about what the minister is saying. Is he saying that he accepts the broad principle behind Mark Griffin’s amendments and that he wants to work with Mr Griffin and others on stage 3 amendments, or is he saying something else entirely? Is he saying that, because legislation already exists, everything is fine, or is he saying that he will bring something back at stage 3?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Graham Simpson
In the previous session of Parliament, the Local Government and Communities Committee produced a report on homelessness. We visited Finland, which uses housing first—Mr Doris was with me on the trip—and we recommended that we have a system of housing first. My good friend Mr Kevin Stewart was the housing minister at the time. Subsequently, we have an element of housing first in Scotland, although it is probably not as widespread as I would wish. However, it seems to me that, in his amendment and in his words, Mr Griffin is describing the way that housing first ought to work. Is he saying that it is not working in the way that it should?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Graham Simpson
I convened the DPLR Committee in the previous parliamentary session, and I agree with Jeremy Balfour. He is absolutely right to say that regulations are not subject to the same level of scrutiny as primary legislation, however much we might like them to be.
This morning, we have seen the great deal of scrutiny that primary legislation goes through. It has been a great process so far. I know that it is taking longer than you might wish, but that is the primary legislation process, and the committee is doing a fantastic job. Regulations are not subject to the same level of scrutiny, so we need to be very careful about using them.
I urge the minister to take up Mr Balfour’s suggestion, and I make the same point—we need to look at the issue again at stage 3.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Graham Simpson
So you do not have that data.