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
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
I have two initial questions and perhaps, if we have time, I can ask a more general one towards the end. The first question relates to part 1, the victims commissioner, and it is about the evidence supplied by the Law Society in its written submission:
“Section 21(2) obliges criminal justice agencies to comply with a request ... to co-operate with the Commissioner in any way considered necessary for the purposes of the Commissioner’s functions.”
However, the society goes on to say:
“there is no enforcement mechanism provided in the event of non-compliance.”
It might well be that there is no likelihood of non-compliance by criminal justice agencies, but we have already heard evidence from some contributors to the committee that the commissioner could lack teeth. From the Law Society’s point of view, what could be done to fix that and ensure that co-operation is guaranteed and that there is some mechanism to ensure that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
It would be a sensible amendment to include, presumably, on the basis that it might happen.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
I am sorry. I did not realise the process.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
I will come back to that question.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
Laura Paton’s report is shocking. The overarching tone is one of complete and utter frustration. She says that everybody knows where the problems are. This is a significant cost to the public purse. She even talks about not wanting to conduct another review because doing so will cost more money, will take more time and will reach the same conclusions on issues that are already known to be the problem.
I agree with John Swinney. I presume that impetus from us would be helpful, but I am not entirely sure what that would look like in practice, given that we appear to know what the problems are, yet the agencies responsible do not appear able to find a way to deal with them.
12:00Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
There are two issues. The letter from Angela Constance talks about an application form being developed. I wonder what that might look like. It should not be a barrier or a hurdle. It should be user friendly. It should also be—to use the buzzword—trauma informed. How can we ensure that the application form will not present a difficulty for those who seek access to court transcripts?
In addition, the letter talks about establishing why people want to access court transcripts. I do not see why that is an issue. Surely, in the interests of open justice and transparency, people should be entitled to do it for whatever reason they see fit. However, that is more of an observation.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
On part 2 and trauma-informed practices, we hear repeatedly about the difficulties that victims or complainers, depending on your preferred terminology, experience when they are going through the criminal justice process. They often talk about the same issues of lack of communication, delays, uncertainty, and all the difficulties that go with that. Is there really a need for legislation to bring trauma-informed practice into the criminal justice process? Why do we need legislation to do that? That question is open to anyone.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
You know my question now, but I will reframe it slightly in a more provocative way. Legislation is being brought forward to ensure trauma-informed practice and my question is this: is this legislation needed because the legal profession has failed to ensure trauma-informed practices in all the past years? I will open that up to anyone who cares to answer.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 25 October 2023
Russell Findlay
Victims and witnesses tell us that repeated delays to their cases can cause additional trauma. Sometimes that happens when solicitors seek to postpone proceedings, usually at the instruction of their client. Some victims perceive that to be a deliberate tactic on the part of the accused. Will the bill go any way towards curtailing the worst examples of that?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 4 October 2023
Russell Findlay
Do you want the provision to encompass those two other things that you have identified?