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 349 contributions
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Ash Regan
The committee has a strong interest in accountability and scrutiny. Will you say a bit about how that is working? Do you think that it is effective? Are you being held to account in a robust manner?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 27 February 2025
Ash Regan
That is helpful. Thanks for putting that on the record.
We will need to be brief, because we are running out of time, but are there areas in which scrutiny could be improved or in which the Parliament or the SPCB needs to do better? Feel free to say whatever you like.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2025
Ash Regan
Your organisation publishes a lot of data sets on performance, including key performance indicators against the functions that are set out in the enabling legislation. Not all the supported bodies are required to do that. Should all the supported bodies publish the same sets of information?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2025
Ash Regan
I want to turn to accountability and scrutiny mechanisms. We are interested to know whether the scrutiny that you are receiving is robust and whether you feel that it is appropriate. Could you give us your view on how you are scrutinised, and whether you think that there are more effective ways in which that could be done?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2025
Ash Regan
I, too, want to ask about the mechanisms around the accountability and scrutiny functions. In your written submission, you suggest鈥攁s you have done in your exchange with Richard Leonard鈥攖hat your mechanisms are appropriate and robust. Annual reports feature as a main part of that scrutiny, certainly for the committees in the Parliament, and you suggest that there are ways in which that mechanism could be made more effective. Could you explain that?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2025
Ash Regan
I will summarise what you have said. There should be increased frequency of your appearances in front of the corporate body and, possibly, in front of committees, although we all understand that there are capacity issues in relation to the Criminal Justice Committee, which is why, in the previous parliamentary session, there was the Justice Sub-committee on Policing, which provided extra capacity.
I want to pick up your point about the reports that you produce. Do you feel that you are not receiving any sort of scrutiny on a number of your reports?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2025
Ash Regan
Different forms of accountability and scrutiny are interacting. We have the corporate body, the SPPA Committee and Audit Scotland. How do you think they are working together? Is there anything that could be done to improve that?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 6 February 2025
Ash Regan
Good morning. I want to cover issues around accountability and scrutiny mechanisms. In your submission to the committee, you set out the various different interactions between those scrutiny mechanisms. Can you explain those a little bit for us and say how they work together and whether they are effective and robust?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee
Meeting date: 6 February 2025
Ash Regan
You mentioned the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. It held additional scrutiny sessions, as I understand it, involving academics and additional organisations. Did that approach improve the scrutiny? What else could we be doing to improve the level of scrutiny and accountability?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 5 February 2025
Ash Regan
I thought that it might be useful to bring to the committee鈥檚 attention things that have been going on in the City of Edinburgh Council that are similar to what Edward Mountain has talked about.
I cannot go into details, but a very concerned constituent came to me to explain serious mishandling of whistleblowing and potential breaches of safeguarding of children that had been going on historically, which I believe are still unresolved. That is in Edinburgh, but I can see that the issue goes further across the country. There appears to be an unacceptably high level of safeguarding failure in the system.
We are talking about children, so I suggest to the committee that, as Edward Mountain set out, the cost should not be an issue. I do not think that the failure in the system is being adequately addressed by the current procedures and processes. I believe that certain public bodies are being defensive in the way that they interact with the Parliament and the Government.
Over the past week, we have seen that the Government, unfortunately, does not have a grip on what is going on across Scotland. As Edward Mountain did, I urge the committee to think seriously about the requests in the petition and take them forward.