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 1222 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
The committee鈥檚 concern is to assess that with more certainty. As the convener said in his questions, we need much greater clarity about the nature of the costs that will be involved in implementing the bill. That is the central issue. There might be lots of good things about it鈥擨 am not taking sides on whether it is good or bad鈥攂ut the principal role of the committee is to understand what the future costs will be and, therefore, how accurate the new financial memorandum is. We have considerable difficulty with that because of the uncertainty that is unfolding from quite a lot of your answers this morning. We simply do not know some of those things. Do you accept that?
11:00Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
But what do you think the on-going discussions on co-design will be about if there are no suggestions of further substantial changes?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
I understand that. The key point here, in relation to what you have just said, is that how the bill is implemented surely has a direct relationship to cost.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
But those are not related to future co-design.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
I will leave it there, convener.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
Did that decision to re-engage largely come from concerns over costs, or did other factors require that re-engagement?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
That is helpful鈥攊n a way.
Co-design can, in principle, have a strong case behind it, as you are engaging with the stakeholders who are collectively making representations to the Government about what the right process might be, but do you accept that, because that process is on-going, it is exceptionally difficult to come to any accurate assessment of what the costs are going to be?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
But is it not the case that co-design is on-going?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
So, if co-design is on-going, and if further representations are made to the Scottish Government about possible changes, does that not have implications for future costs?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 23 January 2024
Liz Smith
Sorry, but can we go back a little bit? In effect, you are saying that, up until this point, the co-design has made the Government have a bit of a rethink about the bill. It has made three substantial changes, two of which involve reducing the costs, in that there will be no transfer of local authority staff or assets and no new care boards. That saves a lot of costs. Should co-design be on-going, and should the outcome of the further co-design be that more substantial changes are suggested, does that not have implications for the costs?