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 1219 contributions
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
I am sure that we can incorporate those comments. As there are no further comments from members, the committee has the following options. It can write to the Scottish Government approving its proposal to consent to the statutory instrument and highlighting any related comments or concerns, or it can write to the Scottish Government rejecting the proposal. Am I right to conclude from what I have heard that Gillian Mackay’s position is that the provision should not be made at all?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
Do members have any final questions?
Members indicated disagreement.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
There will be a division.
For
Joe FitzPatrick (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Sandesh Gulhane (Glasgow) (Con)
Emma Harper (South Scotland) (SNP)
Clare Haughey (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Carol Mochan (South Scotland) (Lab)
Paul Sweeney (Glasgow) (Lab)
David Torrance (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Elena Whitham (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Brian Whittle (South Scotland) (Con)
Against
Gillian Mackay (Central Scotland) (Green)
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
The result of the division is: For 9, Against 1, Abstentions 0.
We will write to the Scottish Government approving the statutory instrument with the caveats that were outlined by members.
I briefly suspend the meeting to allow for a change of panel members.
09:40 Meeting suspended.Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
Do any other members of the panel have a view on that provision? No.
Should there be a narrower definition of what a terminal illness is for the purposes of the bill? A prognostic timescale could be included or the bill could specify that a condition must be untreatable, for example.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
Are there any other comments on that?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
Good morning, and welcome to the second meeting of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee in 2025. Unfortunately, the convener is unable to attend today’s meeting in person and will be joining us online. As deputy convener, I will convene the meeting in her absence. I have received no apologies for the meeting.
Our first agenda item is on United Kingdom subordinate legislation. We will take evidence on a consent notification on the Food and Feed (Regulated Products) (Amendment, Revocation, Consequential and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2025. This is a UK statutory instrument on which the UK Government is seeking the Scottish Government’s consent to legislate in areas of devolved competence. The committee’s role is to decide whether it agrees with the Scottish Government’s proposal to consent to the UK Government making the regulations within devolved competence and in the manner that the UK Government has indicated to the Scottish Government.
At our previous meeting, we considered the notification and agreed to invite the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health to give evidence today. We have until tomorrow, 22 January, to respond to the Scottish Government’s notification, which we will do immediately after this morning’s evidence session. I therefore invite members to debate and decide how they wish to respond in a letter to the Scottish Government.
I welcome to the committee Jenni Minto, the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health; Georgina Finch, who is a senior policy adviser at Food Standards Scotland; Neel Mojee, who is a lawyer for the Scottish Government; and Greig Walker, who is project lead on constitution and UK relations at the Scottish Government. I thank you for joining us.
Before we move on to questions, minister, I believe that you would like to make a brief opening statement.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
Has anyone considered how a narrow definition would work in relation to existing social security definitions, or the impact that that might have on access to benefits at the end of life?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
I thank the witnesses for attending the committee and for answering our questions so fully. Our next meeting will be a week today, when we will continue our stage 1 scrutiny of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill with evidence on law enforcement considerations, followed by an evidence-taking session with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care.
That concludes the public part of our meeting.
12:15 Meeting continued in private until 12:34.Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 21 January 2025
Paul Sweeney
I go back to a point that was raised earlier on autonomy. Do the witnesses recognise that, for some individuals, there might be some therapeutic value and comfort in having the option of assisted dying available, even though they might ultimately not use it? Simply having the option available to them as a safeguard against their fear of pain and the progression of their condition might well provide them with some degree of comfort. Is that something that you might want to consider or reflect on?