Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 1943 contributions
|
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
The pressure is on DS Telford today, but it is his job to enforce the law.
The policy memorandum to the bill says:
“Including rabbits in the definition of wild mammal will aid in the detection and enforcement of hare coursing offences by removing this activity as a potential cover.”
If the Government is hell-bent on including rabbits in the definition of “wild mammal” but prosecution rates for hare coursing offences do not improve—it is obviously very difficult to prosecute at the moment—should that issue be considered in the post-legislative process? Should figures be presented to Scottish ministers regarding that issue? Should the committee consider the matter if the bill does not work, with hare coursers still not found to be breaking the law?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
And the evidence for it.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill
Meeting date: 23 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I am the MSP for Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Even a tiny number can be impactful in certain circumstances. It is therefore important that we do not put a number on things, because that number—even if it is one—could have significant and severe unintended consequences.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
There has been a full discussion on this grouping. On Daniel Johnson’s amendment 25, we must address the policy impact of reforming the law. Most members speaking today have said that, while the reform of the legislation is well intentioned, the bill is clumsy. All of us have said that we need clear, robust guidance from the Scottish Government on the interaction with the 2010 act.
My colleague Pam Gosal was correct to point out that the Scottish Government has brushed off concerns from stakeholders. Pauline McNeill was right to say that public organisations should not be left in the dark. Legislation should be clear. We believe—and I hope that the cabinet secretary is hearing what we are saying on behalf of stakeholders, our constituents and others among the general public—that the proposed new law is not workable and is not clear enough. It is important that the public are reassured that the bill will not harm the rights of women and others, particularly in protection against discrimination—including in pay or in representation on public boards—or in the protection of single-sex spaces, for example in domestic shelters and rape crisis centres. I agree with Foysol Choudhury and Pauline McNeill that it is down to the Scottish Government to tell us what the effect of a GRC is for the purposes of the 2010 act.
Pam Duncan-Glancy says that she wants the Scottish Government to make good law and produce clear guidance. We are all agreed on that: we must give the public clarity. However, I would question what clarity her amendment 37 gives. As the bill stands, the Scottish Government is failing to put a firewall between GRCs and the 2010 act, but at the same time it is making GRCs available to a much larger, wider, more diverse group of people.
Despite the Scottish Government supporting Pam Duncan-Glancy’s amendment 37, we still do not have the reassurance that there is clarity for the delivery of services, jobs and sport on the ground. All that the amendment does is support the SNP position, which has still not been explained.
12:45Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I would like some clarity on the relevance of a GRC under the Equality Act 2010. Does the cabinet secretary believe that a GRC is relevant or irrelevant under that act? Two weeks ago, the Scottish Government argued in court that a GRC changes someone’s sex under the 2010 act. Can she explain that?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I just want to say one more thing, if I may, convener.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I thank Daniel Johnson for his intervention. I did not use those words, but he is entitled to his opinion. I am not going to interfere in how his party decides on business management.
Using the example that the cabinet secretary used of the EHRC guidance, what it suits is shallow. The EHRC supports Foysol Choudhury’s amendment 104, as do I, so why does the Scottish Government not support it? If the Scottish Government truly wants reform, and if the cabinet secretary wants the bill to be passed as a piece of legislation that provides for groundbreaking reform in Scotland, all the political parties should be brought together. We have discussed the bill in good faith and we want to make good law. That is the point. The catch-all approach that the cabinet secretary has been supportive of in previous groupings of amendments would have been preferable for this grouping.
On that point, I seek to withdraw amendment 23.
Amendment 23, by agreement, withdrawn.
Amendment 24 not moved.
Amendment 25 moved—[Daniel Johnson].
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Amendment 21 is a probing amendment that makes it clear that a gender recognition certificate does not change the status of a person as a parent under the Gender Recognition Act 2004. Currently, there is no provision regarding the status of parenthood in the bill. Section 12 of the 2004 act states:
“The fact that a person’s gender has become the acquired gender ... does not affect the status of the person as the father or mother of a child.”
If GRCs that are issued under the new Scottish system change the definitions in relation to mother and father, that could create confusion on their child’s official documents, and it would have cross-border implications.
I hope that the cabinet secretary will tell me that amendment 21 is not necessary and that section 12 of the 2004 act will still apply to GRCs that are issued by the registrar general for Scotland. In that case, I will seek to withdraw it.
I move amendment 21.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 22 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I seek to withdraw amendment 21. All I will say about the amendments in this group is that I am sympathetic to Fulton MacGregor’s amendment 111 on the impact on prisons. It is possible that addressing our concerns through the amendment would have reduced the risk in prisons. The cabinet secretary has indicated that this is dealt with by the Scottish Prison Service, but we still have concerns about the number of individuals seeking to acquire a GRC—a number that will possibly increase tenfold. I am sympathetic to Mr MacGregor’s comment that Pam Duncan-Glancy’s amendment might address this, but we will have to see how the cabinet secretary responds to that. If that is not the case, we could possibly have a discussion and work together to seek to address the concerns that Fulton MacGregor and I both have.
Amendment 21, by agreement, withdrawn.
Section 14—Offences
Amendments 22 and 99 not moved.
Amendments 72 and 73 moved—[Shona Robison ]—and agreed to.
