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 2015 contributions
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Is there any reason why the bill could not replicate SAAB in the structure that it will put in? It does not do that now, but is there any reason why it could not do that?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I appreciate that.
I want to talk a little bit about the equalities aspects. Paul, you just mentioned the SAAB equalities sub-group, and I will return to that. I will start, however, with a question for Carolyn. Thank you for your evidence, which is very important. What I have heard is that the current system is not serving women well. Should there be duties in the bill to mandate, for example, data on participation and achievement disaggregated by gender and background?
12:45Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
If it is all right, convener, I will put my questions on SAAB to Paul Campbell and then move on to my questions about equalities. Does that work?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Thank you for throwing me that line, Mr Davenport—that was helpful. Another explanation is that I might have paraphrased part of your submission. I was interested in unpicking the part of it where you say:
“Integration has been key to that success, and breaking up SDS is a threat to it.”
You alluded to that earlier. You go on to say:
“If the goal is greater efficiency, it must be understood that breaking off part of SDS, while potentially streamlining one element of funding, will introduce far greater inefficiencies elsewhere.”
That is the part of your submission, which I described as the existence of a vacuum, that I wanted to unpick.
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
That is a good point that the committee will reflect on. It could be helpful for us to look at some of the suggestions that come out of that inquiry to see whether we need to do anything with the bill.
Nicola Jackson, do you have a view?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I thank the panel for the evidence that they provided in advance and the evidence that they have given today.
Paul, I want to explore with you the concerns that we have heard in our inquiry, but also in other areas and other spaces, about the winding down of the board. What has been communicated to you and the members of the board, and what has been communicated to employer and apprentice voices, during the transition?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I presume that, if the structural changes that the bill proposes remain, you will be included in the committees and the proposed employer network within the SFC. How would that affect you?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I had wanted to explore some of the engagement with staff, but I think that we have done so already, which has been helpful.
I have only one other question outstanding. Liam, in your evidence, you said there was an impending organisational vacuum with large-scale changes taking place without the planning or resources necessary to manage them safely or fairly. Can you tell us what you mean by “organisational vacuum”?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
I will ask about some of the powers in the bill around finance, accountability and fair work.
In your submissions, you have all highlighted concern about the SFC’s powers undermining academic freedoms. Everyone has picked up on that point, which we need to consider.
Nicola Jackson, you said that you support financial oversight of post-16 institutions, but that it must be linked to fair work outcomes and public accountability. Mary Senior, your submission highlighted that it is important to ensure that all education providers that receive public funds meet national standards for quality, accountability and employability practices.
With that in mind, my question concerns the proposals that are included in the bill around the monitoring and reporting of matters relating to the financial sustainability of post-16 education bodies. To what extent do you think that the proposed powers could improve the SFC’s ability to identify at-risk institutions, for example, and how might the proposals be further strengthened?
Education, Children and Young People Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Pam Duncan-Glancy
Does the bill need to be strengthened to do that? Mary Senior pointed out that we might want to wait until the Pamela Gillies report concludes in relation to responsibilities, but do you have any sense of what is needed to strengthen that accountability?