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
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
That is fair enough. Thank you.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
I will come back in on the point around clause 8 and legislative hierarchy. Clause 8 relates to the removal of the principle of supremacy of EU law. Clause 4 reverses the principle that retained EU law takes precedence over incompatible domestic law. The power in clause 8 will enable ministers to specify that the reversal of the principle does not apply to specific pieces of domestic law and retained EU law and, therefore, that retained EU law continues to take precedence. That will allow ministers to retain the existing hierarchy where that is desirable in order to avoid unintended consequences or to ensure continuity.
The power in clause 8 is exercisable by Scottish and UK ministers in areas of devolved competence. UK ministers are therefore given the power to set the interpretative hierarchy that applies to legislation in devolved areas—bearing in mind that the devolution settlement was never designed with the presumption that we would end up being outside the EU, which has caused disruption.
Do you have any comments to offer on that? I will start with Dr Tucker.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
That is helpful—thank you, Dr Tucker. Sir Jonathan, do you have anything further to add?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
That is certainly helpful. It begs more questions than answers, but I guess that that is just a sign of the constitutional immaturity of the way in which the UK Government is proceeding.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
To hear it put as starkly as that—that Parliament will have no capacity to scrutinise that—was powerful.
There is also the point that ministers will not be able to use the revocation replacement powers to increase regulatory burdens. The Hansard Society has stated that that
“is tantamount, with just a few caveats, to a ‘do anything we want’ power for Ministers”,
and that clause 15(5)
“imposes what amounts to a regulatory ceiling. This is contrary to previous claims from UK Ministers that in some areas REUL might be amended to enhance regulatory requirements (e.g., in the field of animal welfare).”
In your view, Sir Jonathan, will that preclude ministers from improving the standards, rights and protections that are currently enshrined in retained EU law?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
I appreciate that, Sir Jonathan. Dr Tucker, do you have a view on the ratcheting effect, which can move only in one direction if the use of secondary powers for enhancements is not available?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
It seems as though the power of determining that is entirely with the executive, and therein lies the risk of democratic overreach.
I emphasise that the UK Government’s position is—this is stated in the note from the Cabinet Office—that
“the power is required as there are approximately 2000 pieces of secondary retained EU law, including RDEUL, that the Government may wish to replace with legislation more suited to the UK’s needs. Doing so purely through sector specific primary legislation would take a significant amount of Parliamentary time.”
Its justification is that there is not enough capacity in the Parliament to handle that process. I assume, and you might agree, that that is an overly generalised position and that there probably is more capacity and a bit more nuance to it all. Do you agree, Sir Jonathan?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
Before he does, I will add a supplementary question. If ministers were to choose not to bring forward replacement legislation, would there be any opportunity at all for Parliament to scrutinise their decision? Please also feel free to make a general comment in relation to the discussion so far.
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
Morag Ross, do you have any points to add?
Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee
Meeting date: 13 December 2022
Paul Sweeney
That is quite an alarming realisation—that there could potentially be wholesale destruction of legislation in that way.