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 2775 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
I think that that was around November, which means that, despite all the scrutiny and discussion, you had not picked up on the problem any more quickly than the university court. Is that correct?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
Another aspect of financial sustainability is that the SFC needs to identify at-risk institutions. My understanding is that it already has that ability, but that that will now be put into statute. The committee has looked specifically at the University of Dundee, where the SFC did not seem to pick up quickly that there was a problem. Does the bill go far enough in that area, or do we need to do more?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
Do we leave it to the SFC to work out the regime? There seems to be an expectation that colleges and universities will come to the SFC to say that they have a problem, although, clearly, some of them have not done that in the past. On the other hand, the universities are saying, “You shouldn’t be interfering in parts of our work where the research is separately funded.” It seems to me that we need a balance somewhere.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
I am not asking what happened; I am asking when you picked up that there was a serious problem.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
The University of Dundee has been mentioned today. The committee has discussed the issues there. When did you pick up on the serious problems at Dundee?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
I accept that.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
Would they not be admitted as if they were new employees starting on that date?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 7 May 2025
John Mason
Will the member take an intervention?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
John Mason
Exactly.
I agree that we could raise taxes more. I thought that the little graph showing 20 countries and that countries such as Denmark and Norway pay considerably more in tax and get much better public services was very good. I do not know whether you want to comment on that.
I cannot remember exactly when the Government came out with the figures of 9 per cent and 3 per cent—I think that it was at the start of this year. Do you think that that was worth while, or should the Government be speaking to either the STUC or individual unions during the autumn, asking what pay settlement you would want, before it speaks to COSLA or anyone else? How do you see that process working?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
John Mason
Perhaps people can incorporate a response to this question in their final remarks. In its submission, COSLA talks about prevention and early intervention. What, in general, do you think about that? Should we be doing that better in the budget process? Should we have something alongside each of the budget lines that says, “This one’s for prevention”, “This one’s for early intervention” and “This one’s for neither”, or is that just impossible? One could argue that the line for, say, colleges would be both early intervention and just normal practice.