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 2528 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
So, it is relatively unusual from that point of view.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
Even those trends can be changed at a moment’s notice, can they not?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
There is another area in which you are looking for more detail. Under
“Approach to spending reviews”,
you wrote:
“We would also encourage the Scottish Government to ensure spending reviews provide more detailed allocations than just at portfolio level to allow the NHS boards, local authorities and public bodies to develop medium-term spending plans.”
How much detail are you looking for? Is it how much each health board will get? Is that the level of detail that you want?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
The final area, which has been touched on, is about the transparency and public understanding side of things. I watched some of your videos. Your introductory one says that, if someone is watching the video, that shows that they already have a lot of interest. That implies that the general public are not piling on board. We may touch on the OECD as well, but my understanding is that you have met other independent fiscal institutions around Europe or wherever. Are other countries making more progress? Are they doing better when it comes to politicians’ and the public’s understanding of the budget?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
Is that working for them? Is the general public in the Netherlands better at understanding the budget?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
Your annual report indicates that you do not yet have a legal responsibility under the public sector equality duty. Perhaps I should know this, but could you remind us whether that will become a legal responsibility?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
I was struck by the phrase
“The Scottish Fiscal Commission is not yet subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty”.
If I have heard an explanation as to why that is, I have forgotten it, and I would be interested to know more. It would be great if you could come back to the committee at some point with information on when it will become a legal responsibility.
Recruiting staff has been marked as one of your risks. Is it a difficulty? I see that you are changing from a 37-hour to a 35-hour working week. I would have thought that that would be more attractive when you are recruiting staff, but it might not be.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
There are outside members on that committee, too.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
I think that underspends are a good thing and that that money does not need to be spent—although Michelle Thomson obviously thinks that it does. We would do a lot better if more sectors of Government underspent.
Box 2 on page 21 of the OECD report looks at how, in comparison to other countries, the SFC is operating in quite a “high-stakes forecasting environment”. That is the OECD’s choice of wording. All of us together—we, you, and the Government—have less room for manoeuvre than we would in other countries. I was interested to read that the average deficit in OECD countries is 1.4 per cent of gross domestic product, yet we are allowed a deficit of only 0.6 per cent of GDP. I think the OECD’s point is that there is a reputational risk for the SFC because you will get part of the blame if something goes horribly wrong. Is that a problem?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 April 2025
John Mason
Are you saying that the German Länder or American states would not have that?