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 1153 contributions
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
To be clear, are you content that there is sufficient flexibility in the provisions in section 1(5) and (6) as currently drafted to enable Scottish ministers to include the nuances to which you refer, or do you want those provisions to be amended to include specific mention of community-based support?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
Annemarie, would you like to come back in?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
Thank you, all, for coming today. I will turn to the quality of services, service standards and reporting mechanisms. What impact could the implementation of the bill have more broadly on the quality of services and treatment that are provided to people with alcohol and/or drug problems? I am happy to take responses in any order.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
Do any other witnesses have any comments to make on the adequacy of the bill’s reporting mechanisms and the potential for unintended consequences?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
Right, okay—that is helpful.
Annemarie Ward, I wonder whether you have any views on the provisions in section 1(5) and (6) in that regard?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
If I am correct in my understanding, the issue is that some treatments can, and should be expected to, begin on the same day, and one should not expect it to become the norm that the process is dragged out to three weeks.
In the case of residential rehab and access, however, it would definitely be expected that the pathway, involving an initial psychosocial assessment and preparation, would start to get under way within that three-week period as an absolute maximum.
I think that I am clear on that—is that right? The three-week deadline is more to do with the residential pathway than, say, the MAT standard approach beginning on day 1, and the latter should not be considered as something that it is fine to kick into the long grass over a three-week period.
I see that the witnesses are nodding. That is fine—perhaps we can adjust the language in the bill in some helpful ways to clarify those differences in approach.
Let us turn to the definition of “treatment”. The explanatory notes to the bill currently state that the bill
“sets out a non-exclusive list of treatments that may be provided”
and that
“Subsection (6) provides that the Scottish Ministers may add to that non-exclusive list by regulations.”
Are witnesses content that the bill’s definition of “treatment” provides suitable flexibility to accommodate evolving best practices in drug and alcohol recovery and to respond to changes in substance use over time?
Perhaps we can start with one of the witnesses in the room, if anyone has a view on that.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
I thank the witnesses for attending today.
I turn to the issue of timescales in the bill. Section 3(1) states that
“treatment described in section 1(3) is to be made available to the patient as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event no later than 3 weeks after the determination is made.”
Some written submissions from stakeholders have queried the three-week timescale after the treatment determination. Some have raised issues around appropriate preparatory work with those who would be attending treatment to ensure that they are stabilised, assessed and so on.
Do the witnesses think that the bill’s requirement that treatment be made available within three weeks allows sufficient flexibility for necessary preparatory steps, such as assessment and stabilisation, to be undertaken? Would that fall within the intent of the bill’s idea of access to treatment being triggered at that point? I am keen for that provision to be clarified. Perhaps Annemarie Ward can start.
12:00Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
I want to turn to the witnesses in the room to pick up that point. In written correspondence, there has been mention of the fact that, for example, some people might require
“at least 6 weeks of psychosocial interventions and practical organisation.”
Given what has been said, could the drafting be tightened?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
That helpfully moves me on to my next question, which is about the unintended consequences of the reporting mechanisms in the bill as it is currently drafted. You just alluded to some, but could you perhaps expand on the point about potentially unintended consequences?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 13 May 2025
Paul Sweeney
Thank you.