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 MSPs and committees will automatically update to show only the MSPs and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of MSPs and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of MSPs 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 772 contributions
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 22 September 2022
Emma Roddick
That would be helpful. On mitigation, in general, Professor Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, said:
“mitigation comes at a price and is not sustainable”.
Given that the Scottish Government’s current mitigation bill is reported to already be more than £500 million, do you accept that that is the case?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 23 June 2022
Emma Roddick
It is clear that there is quite a contrast, and you will be aware of new analysis that shows that independent European countries that are comparable to Scotland, often with a similar population, are both wealthier and fairer than the UK. Poverty rates are lower in those countries, with fewer children living in poverty and pensioner poverty rates being lower. What are the opportunities if we had the additional powers at our disposal that those other countries have?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 23 June 2022
Emma Roddick
Good morning to both witnesses. First, I pick up on the expectation that was laid out to the Finance and Public Administration Committee that short-term social security spend that addresses child poverty will mean that, in the longer term, fewer people will require that support. Will you explain a bit more about how the long-term finances are expected to be improved in order to deliver that?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 23 June 2022
Emma Roddick
I will move on to other issues that were raised by witnesses. In May, Kirsty McKechnie, from the Child Poverty Action Group, told us that she believes there is a
“direct correlation between food bank use and the two-child limit.”—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 19 May 2022; c 4.]
The Govan Law Centre told us that the removal of the £20 universal credit uplift made the difference between people having to use food banks and not, and Inclusion Scotland told us that the five-week wait for universal credit sets folk up to fail. What analysis has the Scottish Government done of the overall impact of those and other UK Government welfare policies?
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 23 June 2022
Emma Roddick
Yes.
Social Justice and Social Security Committee
Meeting date: 23 June 2022
Emma Roddick
We have heard from quite a few witnesses—in particular, from experts by experience—about the ways in which mental health issues are made worse by debt and the ways in which debt prevents people from accessing advice services, especially where trauma is involved. Is the Scottish Government aware of that difficulty, and is it doing specific work to encourage services to become trauma informed?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 14 June 2022
Emma Roddick
A lot of my questions have been gone through in great detail, so I will try to avoid retreading.
My question is for Naomi Cunningham. We have heard comments about self-ID and concerns that that could mean expanding the group of people who would be able to obtain a GRC. I am aware that previous witnesses at the committee have described the current process as discriminatory. If there are barriers for people who do not have a lot of money or who live somewhere without easy access to gender identity services, is it not incumbent on us to do exactly that—to expand the group of people who are able to obtain a GRC?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 14 June 2022
Emma Roddick
I will move on to that. There have been quite a few comments on the need for a standard to be met or for proof to be standardised. However, the experience of trans people is as diverse as that of cisgender people. Is it possible, while also respecting trans people’s right to privacy and dignity, to prescribe an experience that they must go through or prove that they have experienced in order to have their identity recognised by the state?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 14 June 2022
Emma Roddick
I suppose that that is my point. The only connecting theme for trans people is that they have changed their gender, so we cannot say, “Well, you must have done this as well.”
I will move on to other issues. Naomi Cunningham commented on the long-term effects on the lives of children who transition and change gender. Do you have any reflections on the long-term effects of 16 to 18-year-olds moving on to a new life at university or somewhere else and having to start that life while living in a gender that is not theirs?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 14 June 2022
Emma Roddick
To be clear about the financial side, the current gatekeeping includes the need to access services, which can be financially prohibitive. There can also be fees associated with seeking medical proof of what a person has been through. There are lots of recognised costs to going through the process as it currently exists, besides applying for a GRC and paying the £5. That is what I was referring to.
If trans people are coming forward to say that barriers exist for them, do we not have a duty to take those barriers down? After Naomi Cunningham, I invite Karon Monaghan to respond to that.