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 1311 contributions
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I have a final question. What is your view on the arguments made that the transitional provisions will lead to uncertainty for partners in a lease during a transition period? Do you have any views on that?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Good morning. Thank you for coming along and for your evidence. I will ask similar questions to those that I asked the first panel鈥攁gain, if you do not have a view, that is absolutely fine.
What is your position, if you have one, on the criticism that has been made in response to the call for views on section 28 of the bill, which would allow tenants to withhold payment if a landlord fails to notify them of their UK address?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Stacey, do you have anything to add?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Can I just push you slightly on that? I am not questioning what you are saying, but are you arguing that, with lots of amendments at stages 2 and 3, the bill could be made to work, or are you saying that it is so flawed that, even with all those amendments, it would not be good law, and we should just vote it down and go away and think again? Can you clarify that for me, please?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Okay. That is helpful.
We have heard some criticism about section 30(3), which says that landlords should serve an irritancy notice to a tenant鈥檚 creditor. What is your position is on whether section 30(3) works for landlords and tenants?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I have one further question. If you covered this before I arrived, I apologise. We heard from the Faculty of Advocates last week, as you probably have, and ultimately, its view was that the bill should not proceed and that we should go back and rethink it. That was not necessarily the view of the Law Society of Scotland or those in practice. From an academic perspective, should we proceed with the bill, or are you of the view that the Government should go away and think again?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
The Law Society has gone a step further, saying that the tenant should have to give notice to the landlord if there is a heritable security over the property. Do you agree with that position?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
What is your position on the criticism in response to the call for views on section 30(3), which requires landlords to serve irritancy notices to a tenant鈥檚 heritable creditor?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
Stacey, have you anything to add?
Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 May 2025
Jeremy Balfour
I have only one amendment to the bill. As Meghan Gallacher pointed out earlier, some of us are due at other committees鈥攊ndeed, I am already due in another place鈥攕o I have asked my colleague to move or not move the amendment in due course.
We have heard from Mr Simpson and Ms Chapman about the need for the bill to give students more protection. Amendment 183 is similar to but goes further than Ms Chapman鈥檚 amendment 535 in the requirement for a guarantor.
I lodged the amendment after having a number of meetings with people in my region, particularly the University of Edinburgh.
The Government and the Parliament need to look at two issues before the bill becomes an act. As we heard from Maggie Chapman, overseas students arrive here looking for accommodation. Many of them know no one in the country and they do not know how to get a guarantor. They either have to pay excessive amounts of money or are unable to find appropriate accommodation. I am not sure that I want to move amendment 183, but, when the minister closes, I would welcome him speaking to what it suggests, to find out what way he believes we can go forward.
We seek to encourage people from different backgrounds to attend our universities in Scotland, so the second issue that we have to consider is those who come from a low-income background. Many of them do not have an individual who can guarantee their rent. That can put them off going to their choice of university or the type of course that they do. That seems to go against everything that we are trying to achieve as a Parliament. My understanding is that all parties want universities to be open to anyone who has the academic ability, rather than just to those who have the financial ability only. For that reason, I look forward to hearing what the minister is going to say.
I should say that it is not my intention to move amendment 183, but I think that we can come together on all the different amendments in the group. I look forward to something coming forward, either from the Government or from me or another member at stage 3, to give that protection.