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 1673 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Russell Findlay
No, I am content—we are in agreement. I am glad that we can look at those points.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Russell Findlay
Is this a final position, or will we have more time?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Russell Findlay
In respect of one of the clauses, the need for it to be UK-wide relates to prohibiting the purchase and trade of pill presses. According to the Parliament website, the Scottish Government has been talking to the Home Office about that for at least two years. It would obviously create a big problem if pill presses were outlawed in the rest of the UK but not here, so I think that that one is straightforward.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 6 March 2024
Russell Findlay
I have comments on both SSIs; I will start with the one on firefighters that Katy Clark has just mentioned. I see that the Scottish Government has put a wrong date in it. It is a mistake, and it does not look like it will have any impact whatsoever, but the DPLR Committee has said to us that the date should be corrected. The date relates to death-in-service payments for firefighters. The Scottish Government has said that, even though the wrong date is on the order, any applications for payment would be honoured if they are received by what is considered to be the correct date. The Government’s position appears to be “trust us”—applications after the date on the order are not likely to happen and, if they were to happen, the Scottish Government would respect them. I think that that is in writing.
I wonder whether, for technical reasons and in line with what the DPLR Committee has asked, we should consider ensuring that the date is fixed before the SSI proceeds, or whether we are happy with the SSI as it is and that it is just a technical matter.
I turn to the SSI on sex offender notification. Essentially, it removes Tain from the list of police stations in which a registered sex offender notification requirement can be fulfilled. A Sunday Post investigation earlier this year found that there has been a significant rise in the number of registered sex offenders in the Highlands—it has gone up 50 per cent in two years. That is attributed to people who are on the registered sex offender list seeking to go somewhere where they are perhaps not known.
I note that, on page 7 of paper 2, the Scottish Government says that
“the local councillor ... has been informed”
of the change for the police station. It says “local councillor” in singular, but the ward of Tain in Easter Ross has three councillors, and I am curious to know whether they have all been consulted. I dare say that they would not particularly object to registered sex offenders no longer attending at their local police station. Perhaps more importantly, have the councillors in the police station area where those offenders are now to be directed been consulted? I do not want to slow the process, but I put that out there.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
You and your officials have talked about the system of dog wardens in Scotland, which are controlled by local authorities. In your answer to my colleague Sharon Dowey a moment ago, you mentioned that 1,200 dogs are subject to dog control notices. Do you happen to know how many dog wardens there are in Scotland?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
Minister, you have told us today that there has been a lack of respect towards the Scottish Government. We are perhaps losing sight of what the measures are about, however. They are about preventing children and adults from being maimed and killed by XL bullies. Surely you agree that public protection is paramount rather than constitutional issues or bruised egos within the Scottish Government.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
Sure, but the legislation was in the public domain in mid-September; you could have acted more quickly if you had chosen to do so.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
Your officials have working connections with officials at UK level. It sounds like you are making excuses.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
The reason for the controls being brought in is to protect public safety after a spate of horrific attacks, some of which were fatal and some of which involved children. Our thoughts are with all those who have been harmed or lost their lives in those attacks.
We whole-heartedly welcome the Scottish Government finally coming to the right decision. I would like to know—was this a case of spectacularly poor judgment or dithering, or was it simply an opportunity to seek divergence from the rest of the UK?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 21 February 2024
Russell Findlay
For weeks if not months, the Scottish Government was warned by the UK Government, politicians in the Scottish Parliament, the media and experts that this was an inevitable consequence of the rest of the UK legislation.
You said in your opening statement that dog attacks are rare, but there have been two XL bully attacks in Scotland in the past month, one of which was just three days ago. In both those attacks, people were harmed, and both were so serious that Police Scotland had to use firearms to kill the animals. Reportedly, both of those dogs came from elsewhere in the UK. Do you therefore regret not acting quicker?