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 1578 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
It is not always fraudulent activity that you flag up. For example, I presume that bodies that participate in the NFI submit data sets and your analysis flag up issues such as duplicate payments. The report says that around £750,000-worth of duplicate creditor payments were identified. Do you know how much of that was erroneous, or what number of payments were identified as duplicate matches of data but were actually valid? For example, as you say, you could buy a £2,000 laptop from a creditor and the next day do exactly the same thing again. That would perhaps be flagged as an erroneous payment and potential fraud, but it could be a valid payment made by a body. What work do you do thereafter to match or marry up the value in that data identification with what happened next or the follow-up activity?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
That would be good—thank you.
I have two quick questions. Housing benefits and pensions are quite big pieces of work as part of the initiative. I perhaps did not understand some of the terminology, as there is a lot of jargon in the report. Talk me through what it means when we are told that the average individual value of overpayments for housing benefit rose from just over £2,000 to £6,500 in a short period. Is that to do with the value of payments or with the level of potential fraud?
I appreciate that, since 2018, there has been a marked shift from a bespoke housing benefit payment, for example, to universal credit, which has perhaps mopped up some of the more individual benefits. However, I could not quite get my head around the situation with housing benefit fraud, such as whether you have identified a rise or decline.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
If fraudulent housing benefit claims are picked up through the work that you do, do you tell the DWP or the local authority about that?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Does Audit Scotland charge fees for that work?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Do any local authorities in Scotland not participate in the NFI?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I was particularly struck by the second of the key messages on page 3 of your report. Perhaps I can draw your attention to the last sentence of that and ask you to explain or clarify a little bit what it means and why you have said it. In summary, you say:
“Overall, it is not clear whether underlying levels of fraud have increased since 2020/21.”
That flags up a point of concern for me, but I will give you an opportunity to clarify what you mean by that.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Do you add value to the work that in-house fraud teams do? I presume that the DWP has a massive fraud team, as does His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and other big bodies across the UK that manage large sums of money for large numbers of people. I presume that they have many people who sit in an office and look at fraud. What value does your small team add to any of that?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I am sure that, when the Auditor General comes knocking on the Scottish Commission for Public Audit’s door for more money, that will be part of his pitch.
I have one final question. Are you doing anything in relation to Covid-related fraud? Obviously, there has been a lot of noise around the potential scale, volume and value of many different aspects of Covid spending, particularly around the work of HMRC in relation to loans, grants and so on, but there may be other bodies that you do work for that have been affected by Covid fraud, to use that phrase.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I presume, then, that the media article that I came across in my research ahead of today’s meeting was erroneous in claiming that Perth and Kinross Council is
“one of ... two UK local authorities which does not share ... electoral roll”
data
“with the National Fraud Initiative”.
Is that true, or is the article incorrect?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Okay. Perhaps that is something that we can follow up with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, for example, as the body that assists and represents a number of local authorities in Scotland.