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 805 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
What is your assessment of the root cause of the delays in using section 5, and can you speak to how your bill would address those?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
I was asking about the debate in the Parliament after Scottish ministers have used the section 5 power to designate a new public authority.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
Yes.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
Thank you. I will stop you there, Katy, because I was perhaps unclear in my question. The uncertainty is about when the legal change would take effect under the resolution in proposed new section 5A of the 2002 act.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
That is helpful. Thank you.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
That is helpful.
There were positive responses to the proposal to “pause” time for compliance in both the consultation by the Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee—I am in the wrong job to not be able to say “post-legislative”—and the consultation by the member in charge of the bill, Katy Clark.
Your response said that the proposal
“would undoubtedly be preferable to the approach required by the current regime” .
The Scottish Government suggests that improved guidance for public authorities on seeking clarification could address the information requesters’ concerns about delays. We will all have views on how helpful guidance is. Do you agree that guidance alone would resolve those issues? What changes would you expect to see in the revised code of practice in terms of timing and the approach to clarification requests?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
That was helpful. What are your views on the proposal to repeal the regulations that allow an extension of up to 60 working days for grant-aided and independent special schools whenever the statutory deadline for responding to a request would otherwise fall on a day that is not a school day?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
Thank you. That is helpful.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
Good morning. Thank you for the memo you sent to the committee, which lays out your position, and for your opening statement. Both were helpful. I have a couple of questions: one is about an area where the Government is supportive and the other is about an area where it is not.
The first question is on publicly owned companies. The Information Commissioner and the Scottish Government were the only organisations to provide substantive views on the proposal in section 3 that provides for a technical amendment to the definition of publicly owned companies. Are you able to provide examples of companies that would fall within the revised definition of a publicly owned company?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 November 2025
Ruth Maguire
I understand that. Have any specific information requests or appeals been made to your office that would illustrate the impact of that anomaly on access to information for the public?