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 1198 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
I just want to be clear about what is being proposed. The minister has suggested that there will be a round-table event to allow people to go away and consider all the issues. Meanwhile, we will be passing the bill as proposed at stage 3, which presumably will happen before the conclusions of the round-table event have come back. Will those conclusions be included later as amendments to what at that point will be the act? Is that correct, minister?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
That is not quite what I asked, minister. I asked whether you had received formal legal advice when arriving at your position of confidence and thinking that the amendment distorts things.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
The minister suggested that amendment 206 does not specify which cases it relates to. How does that position hold up when, arguably, it is specified because it is about cases that are permitted pursuant to section 15? Will the minister address that point?
Will she also address the point about time, which was made when my colleague Ross Greer intervened on me and I responded? There are matters that could arise between the initial statement that the minister has spoken about and any further statement. Will she address that point?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
Ross Greer intervened on me and I thought that it was a fair intervention. He said that, if a statement has already been made earlier in the process, it could be argued that we are asking people to relive their trauma. My response was that the amendment would simply give the victim the option to make a further statement. You did not address that point in your remarks, so I wonder whether you could give us your thoughts about that.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
With respect, minister, you can. I was saying that the amendment would give the victim a further opportunity. It is not about ethos; it is about offering a further opportunity. Why do you reject that opportunity being afforded?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
Something occurs to me that follows on from Willie Rennie’s well-made point. Has the minister considered the possibility that the solution might be to remove the sections, have the round table and bring the provisions back in a final format in whatever the next vehicle is—the next bill that comes forward—in order to get it right, rather than to pass something that may need to be reviewed later?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
I do.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
I would like to clarify something. Earlier in your statement, and particularly during your response to Martin Whitfield, you said that you were “confident” that the courts will do something, that one of the amendments will possibly “impact on ... rights” and that you think that the
“amendment distorts the existing legal protections”.
Can you help the committee to understand whether you have received any formal legal advice that gets you to that position to reject the amendments, or is that just what you think?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
Thank you.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 31 January 2024
Liam Kerr
Again, with the committee’s indulgence, I will speak to amendment 206, in Russell Findlay’s name. Mr Findlay apologises for not being able to be with us today due to other committee business.
Victims must be heard. Recently the Criminal Justice Committee heard powerful and moving accounts from six rape survivors. Those women described being
“treated as a bit of evidence”,
“not respected”, “treated with contempt”, feeling as if “I did not matter” and feeling like “collateral damage”. They also described the court environment as “threatening”, and one said:
“the justice system failed me more than the perpetrator”.—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 17 January 2024; c 6, 37-8.]
It was astonishing testimony about what were all recent cases.
The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 gives victims of certain crimes the right to make a statement on the crime’s impact, to be submitted to court after a conviction and prior to sentencing to inform the judge or sheriff in their sentencing decision. That has since been extended, with victim impact statements now commonplace.
As I said last week, more serious cases will be dealt with by the panel, and the number of cases will inevitably increase with the raised age limit. One would think it obvious that a victim should be heard, regardless of whether they have been assaulted by an 18-year-old sent to a panel or someone older who is in court. Looking back, therefore, I would say that the arguments for victim impact statements as a principle have been made and accepted. Victims must have their say, regardless of the forum, and amendment 206 would ensure that their voices are heard and that important rights are not seen to be eroded.