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 1189 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Liz Smith
Okay. So, there is the potential for some increase.
I have one final question. In an answer to Michael Marra, you said that you think that the new bill is, in the main, fairly settled. What evidence do you have for that?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
To make that decision, we also need the right information.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
Yes. The Scottish Legal Aid Board made the point that it has powers to use discretion. In its evidence to the committee, it commented that that fact is not necessarily very well known, but it also said that, in order for it to be able to use that discretion effectively鈥攖o ensure that people are getting the help that they need鈥攊t needs to know an awful lot more information about the claimant. Therefore, some of the questioning might be a bit more intrusive, because it has to deal with sensitive issues to ensure that people get that help, but, at the same time, one of the founding principles of the Scottish Government鈥檚 social security system is to be less intrusive. Could you comment on that?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
We also heard from the Scottish Legal Aid Board that, in some instances, there are barriers for people who are applying for civil court orders. Does the Scottish Government have a view on supporting automatic civil legal aid for that kind of situation?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
The whole point is to ensure that we get the right information from the claimant. In circumstances where the abuser has been causing difficulties, we need that information as well. That is the conundrum about how the Government approaches its demands of the social security system and whether the agencies that work on that basis are asking the right questions. That is what it is all about.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
Minister, in your opening remarks, you said that the Scottish Government has built a very different social security system, one that the Government cites as being much less adversarial and intrusive and much more compassionate. However, we heard from the Scottish Legal Aid Board that, when it comes to assessing people鈥檚 financial eligibility for help, particularly if it has to use discretion, it needs quite a lot more information than might otherwise be the case. That is a bit of a paradox, so can the Scottish Government comment on that?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
Minister, I understand all that, and it is a very sensitive area, for obvious reasons. However, the Scottish Legal Aid Board is arguing that, in order to help somebody effectively鈥攖o ensure that it gets the right information in order to decide whether it should use its discretion with regard to certain payments鈥攊t sometimes has to ask pretty difficult questions, but the Scottish Government has built a social security system that shies away from being too intrusive and too adversarial. Is that not a problem with regard to addressing some of the issues to help people who very genuinely need support?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
Whether we are talking about south or north of the border, to ensure that social security is effective, in the context of the whole system, we have to be compassionate and understanding about those who are genuinely in need, and that approach has been the overall intention of the Scottish Government. The problem is that, if you become more compassionate, less adversarial and less intrusive, as the Scottish Legal Aid board was arguing, you might miss out on some essential information that the individual might not give you for whatever reason. That is quite a substantial problem, because these are the most vulnerable people whom we are trying to support. If they do not provide the information because it is not being asked for, there is a difficulty.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Liz Smith
Again, it was a point that came up from the Scottish Legal Aid Board鈥檚 evidence. The whole basis for that approach is to make things as easy as possible and ensure that those who are most in need get the support and benefits that they require. At the moment, there seems to be a grey area鈥攍et us call it that鈥攁s to how we go about that. That has come right through the evidence that we have taken, and it is about ensuring not just that the Scottish Government is aware of all that but that, through its various agencies, it can address some of those concerns. The big conundrum is that compassion is all very well, but, if that approach does not drill down on the information that we need, we will not get very far.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 May 2025
Liz Smith
Do people demand judge-led public inquiries, because they believe that that person will have the legal authority and standing to get more out of the evidence?