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 3298 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 5 March 2025
Richard Leonard
My reading of what has been included in the Auditor General’s findings is that he thinks that there should be a strategic shift and a cultural shift. There seems to be a culture of reaction rather than proactivity. Whether that is in the context of the fiscal sustainability part of the report or in the context of the public service reform part of the report, that seems to be a common thread.
I have a further point to make before I invite other committee members to come in. In what I thought was a very informative response to the key messages in the report, the main findings and the recommendations for action, you mentioned that you fully embraced the need for equality and human rights impact assessments of decisions that are made. How do you persuade me that it will be different this time? In exhibit 10, the report before us reflects the fact that, back in August 2019, the Scottish Government produced a set of key questions that decision makers must ask themselves when they are setting budgets:
“1. What outcome is the policy and associated budget decision aiming to achieve?
2. What do you know about existing inequalities of outcome in relation to the budget area?
3. How will your budget decisions impact different people and places?
4. How will your budget decisions contribute to the realisation of human rights?
5. Could the budget be used differently to better address existing inequalities of outcome and advance human rights?
6. How will the impact of budget decisions be evaluated?”
Those are all long-established principles that the Government has set itself, yet the report lays bare the pretty woeful attempt to incorporate equality and human rights impact assessments in any decisions about budgets that are being made.
You have told us that you agree with the recommendation on that aspect and that things will be different, but that seems to be a long way from the experience that we have had so far.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
Good morning. I want to pick up on some of the issues that you discussed in answer to the previous series of questions.
One of the standard questions that we are asking everyone, and which uses the terminology of the landscape, is: to what extent do you see yourselves as having an advocacy function, and to what extent are you regulatory?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
Thank you. That was helpful.
I should note for the Official Report that the first time that Professor O’Hagan and I met was when she was working for the Equal Opportunities Commission and I was working for the GMB trade union. In that respect, I was struck by what your written submission says in relation to your search for new powers, as some of them—the ability to take forward litigation, support legal proceedings and so on—look like the powers that the Equal Opportunities Commission used to have. It is worth noting for the Official Report that your long list of asks includes your powers being strengthened so that they cover your being able to
“Provide legal advice ... Raise legal proceedings ... Conduct inquiries in less limited circumstances ... Require and compel information ... Make unaccompanied and unannounced visits to any human rights duty bearer”
and
“Hold public hearings and require duty bearers to be present”.
You also ask for a bigger commission, but that is perhaps a separate point.
Could you run us through the difference that those additional powers would make to the work that you do at the moment?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
Quite recently, we had a debate in the Parliament about your report on the Highlands and Islands. There is a real sense that people’s human rights are not being upheld in a whole range of areas, including access to public services, health services and culture. However, I cannot just go to the Inverness sheriff court and get a remedy for that.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
If you had powers in that area, what more would you be able to do?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
I have another quick, and much more straightforward and practical, question about shared services. One of the things that we are looking at is the extent to which shared services support exists and how it can be enhanced. What are the barriers to greater shared services?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
I will go back to the regulator and advocacy distinction. Do you see yourself as having a regulatory role?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
Thank you. That was very clear and helpful.
There are other labels that get bandied about, such as the extent to which you are “proactive” or “reactive”; indeed, we have used those terms ourselves earlier, and you have answered Lorna Slater’s question on that point. This might seem invidious, but could you put percentages on the balance of your workload between proactive and reactive activities?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
That was a very helpful answer. Thank you.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Richard Leonard
Imagine it, Mr Hobbs. Would you like them?