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 1535 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 29 September 2021
Ross Greer
I accept that.
I am conscious of the time, and I am probably intruding on the time of other members. If I could come back in at the end, that would be appreciated, but I understand if I cannot.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 29 September 2021
Ross Greer
I am sorry to jump in. I do not particularly want to pursue the specifics of the appeals process, but, given that you have raised the issue and that we have had exchanges about it in the past, I note that there was not a particularly large number of appeals this year. Did any of those appeals result in a downgrade?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 September 2021
Ross Greer
What timescale has the Government given you for the work that will get you the more granular information that is required?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 September 2021
Ross Greer
We will probably book you in for an appointment in spring to talk about that.
You mentioned some of the money for transport, which is a useful example of another issue that I want to raise in relation to the explanation that Government provided for underspend. Your report mentions that the explanation that was given for some of the underspend on money for buses, for example, was that some operators moved back to a place of viability more quickly than was expected. No explanation is mentioned in your report for the underspend on rail. Is that simply because it is a relatively high-level report and you were just looking to provide some commentary, or are there areas in which you have not been given a sufficient explanation from the Government for underspends?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 September 2021
Ross Greer
To return to Daniel Johnson’s initial line of questioning, I am still trying to understand the relationship between the underspend of Covid-specific funds in 2020-21 and the reallocation of non-Covid budgets towards Covid-related purposes in that year. In the report, the Auditor General identified a £700 million gap between the amount of money that was specifically allocated for Covid-related purposes and the identified spend in that area. However, simultaneously, more than £1 billion was reallocated from non-Covid budgets to Covid-specific purposes. How much of that £700 million was spent but has not yet been identified as Covid spend, for the reasons that you noted earlier? How much of it was simply not spent in that year because, presumably, it came too late and other money has already been allocated to meet that need?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 September 2021
Ross Greer
I think that “£5 million underspend” is probably not the most useful phrase for us to use, and the business allocation might be the best example of that. The money was spent and it was spent quite well, just not in exactly the same way.
I have a final, potentially quite daft, question. You mentioned some of the reallocations, such as money that had been initially allocated for bus passenger subsidies being moved over to support operators directly. I take it that, in terms of the budget lines that list spend on buses, that is the same money appearing in the same place, and it does not create the appearance of an underspend in one area, because that money has been allocated to spend in another.
11:15Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 September 2021
Ross Greer
Thank you. That is all from me.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 22 September 2021
Ross Greer
My supplementary was on Bob Doris’s line of questions, and the conversation has moved on a touch, so I am happy to bring it into my line of questioning.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 22 September 2021
Ross Greer
In that case, I will be very brief.
I want to go back to the issue of the volume of assessments—it might have been Willie Rennie who raised it—that young people had to sit in the three or four-week sprint in April and May, in particular. Yesterday, I spoke to a young person who had had 30 assessments in a fortnight, and they were taking two highers and two advanced highers, so that was on top of dissertation deadlines and so on. Did you receive any guidance from the SQA as to how those final assessments should be timetabled to avoid that kind of compression? A lot of that was due to the perfectly valid motivation of teachers to let pupils sit the same assessment over again a couple of times to maximise their chance of getting a good grade, but the cumulative impact was quite negative for the mental health of some young people.
11:00Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 22 September 2021
Ross Greer
I am keen to hear the rationale for that. In the areas where local authorities excluded that data, such as those in my region, I heard much more from teachers and pupils, who came forward with concerns, because the one year in which the gap closed quite considerably was excluded for moderation purposes. Could you explain why you felt that it was appropriate to include 2020 data for moderation?