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 1200 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 12 December 2023
Liz Smith
Good morning. I want to ask you about a comment that your colleague Paul Johnson made, which was that he felt that Mr Hunt was on course—just “on course”—to meet what he described as
“his (poorly designed) fiscal rule”.
What do you feel is “poorly designed” about it, and what would you like to see instead?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 12 December 2023
Liz Smith
Thank you for that. Therefore, there is a problem with regard to the timescale but you also feel that it is not sufficiently diverse in its targets—it is too tight. Is that what you are saying?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
I want to pursue that last point. Obviously, when the aggregates tax is introduced, that will be quite a big change to the work that you undertake. For a start, you will be responsible for its collection and management. You say on page 44 of your resource accounts report that you are “working closely” with the Scottish Government on how to set that up. Will that have considerable ramifications for the way in which you operate your workforce?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
Given that SEPA is not able to provide that, are you likely to have to train up individuals specifically to have those skills, if they have to go out to quarries or wherever?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
Everything that you have said this morning gives us a high degree of confidence in the professionalism of Revenue Scotland. Obviously, the change is potentially a substantial one, and we want to identify that we have the right capacity and the skills required for the collection and management of the new tax. You sound reasonably confident about that.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
I am sure that we will scrutinise the financial memorandum carefully.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
Does that have a cost?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
Will you work with the Scottish Fiscal Commission on that data?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 5 December 2023
Liz Smith
Obviously, that will be essential, as it has been with the two existing taxes. It will also be very helpful to us.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 21 November 2023
Liz Smith
Good morning. I will pick up the theme of the principles of the Smith commission, which are inherent within both the 2016 fiscal framework and this one.
The cabinet secretary will know that the witnesses who have come to the committee plus the three Davids—Iser, Bell and Phillips—are very clear that there are tensions within those principles; specifically, that there is a tension between taxpayer fairness and the principle of no detriment. Does the Scottish Government accept that very strong tension? Out of those two—taxpayer fairness and no detriment—would you focus on one of them as the particular priority?