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 1560 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
Thank you for your evidence so far, which is invaluable to the committee. I want to touch, first of all, on the appointment of inquiry chairs, so I will come to you, Lord Hardie. Your CV is one of many decades of distinguished service to Scottish public life. This follows on from Mr Mason’s questions. If somebody had said to you, “This inquiry will take up nine years of your professional life,” would you have said yes to chairing it?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
Of course, and that is useful. However, with regard to the inquiries that are being set up in Scotland, there seems to be a preponderance—almost a monopoly at the moment—of judge-led inquiries. You are saying that other options are available, so can you speculate as to why so many inquiries are judge led?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
Are you aware, through conversations, of members of the judiciary having turned down requests to chair an inquiry on the basis of how long it might take?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
You described the situation that led to the tram inquiry as a “public scandal”. Some of the fallout of your inquiry has been that people think that part of the issue with the trams in the first place was the huge delays and cost overruns, and then they look at the inquiry and say, “It’s gone on for nine years, with huge delays and cost overruns.” Does that slightly undermine the inquiry’s credibility? Were you concerned about that?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
Do you think that the explanation that Mr Flannigan has just given would be understandable to the public, minister?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
For clarification, minister, is it correct that the bill no longer establishes a national care service?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
That is useful. There is already some language in terms of civil servants, names of departments and so on. I understand that changing those might not be a priority, but, for clarity and for the public, I note that you started out by saying that you want there to be transparency as to those who are accountable. It is important to recognise that.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
Okay. That is useful.
In your opening remarks to the convener, you said that the state of the financial projections is a function of the bill being at stage 2 rather than at stage 3. You have to recognise that we cannot evaluate a financial memorandum on that basis. Financial memorandums are presented at the start of the scrutiny of a bill, with projections. We look at them and consider whether they are realistic, and we ask the kind of questions that the convener has been asking. We cannot just have a blank cheque, waiting for what might happen at stages 2 and 3. That is not a reasonable position, is it?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
There are other reasons why you have been back in front of the committee. One of your predecessors, Kevin Stewart, objected to the idea that the bill might cost up to £1.2 billion. We then had evidence from civil servants and from you that it could cost up to £3.9 billion. The range of figures that you have brought to the committee over the past several years has been staggering, given the difference between them and the lack of clarity. We are still in a position, now, where we are referencing three different sets of documents across different timeframes in trying to understand what the variety of cost impacts might be. Do you think that that is being transparent to the public?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 27 May 2025
Michael Marra
You started by saying to the convener that you have to be accountable to the public. Do you think that the public could understand that variety of different documents and the fact that we are comparing them? For instance, the original financial memorandum was extrapolated over 10 years, with a sum of £1.8 billion to £3.9 billion, but the new financial update covers seven years, with a cost of £436.6 million to £724.8 million. Even the timeframes over which you are undertaking the analysis are not comparable. Is there a reason for that?