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 982 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
Another risk relates to what happens as a result of decisions taken by the UK Government. The MTFS refers to one issue, which is domestic demographics. However, defence spending could ride a coach and horses through the UK budget, which would have a consequence here. Given the global economic and defence security position, you get the impression that defence expenditure is likely to rise rather than fall as a percentage of the UK budget. What risks are there for devolved areas of expenditure if the UK Government has to cut front-line public spending in the rest of the UK?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
Good morning. Quite a lot of the ground that I had intended to cover has been covered. However, I have a question for Professor Roy about the form, function and frequency of the various reports that the committee looks into.
We criticised the delay to the medium-term financial strategy. We are now having a spending review which, if it was going to be warts and all and completely open and frank, we probably would not want to have on the eve of a Scottish parliamentary election. From your vantage point, could more be done in the next parliamentary session to streamline the process and declutter the number of reports and strategies, so that we get a much clearer impression of where Scotland’s public finances are?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
You said in the fiscal update that ending fiscal transfers would improve the scrutiny and functioning of the Scottish budget, as they have serious material effects, particularly on the health, education and local government portfolios. From your discussions with the Scottish Government, why do you think that it is so reluctant to make what would seem like a relatively modest and sensible change to the way in which it presents its accounts?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
You have a presumption against it.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
But surely if you set a 9 per cent pay policy and you are at 7-plus per cent after two years, with inflation running at more than 3 per cent—and it could be higher or lower by the time that we get to the third year of the negotiation—you are effectively saying that your negotiating position is nil, because you are not willing to countenance strike action. Therefore, the public sector unions have you over a barrel, have they not?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
But—
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
This question is more about the costs between now and the end of the decade. You have set public pay policy at 9 per cent over the next three years. In the first two years, the figure has exceeded 7.4 per cent in some areas. Obviously, you will not be in post, but, thinking beyond the election, how rigid will the Government be in the remainder of the public sector pay negotiations? Are you now saying that, if the level is presently running at 7.4 per cent, then 1.6 per cent is the limit, or are you willing to breach your own public sector pay policy?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
You have achieved £300 million of savings, and you are now proposing a figure of £2 billion. I want to look at some of the risks that your civil servants have identified. The document that I have says:
“There is a risk that by focussing workforce reductions on corporate functions we reduce capacity to develop and implement the changes required within functions to deliver savings”.
Effectively, that means that if you get rid of those people, you potentially get rid of the capacity to make the efficiency savings that you desire to make.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
As anybody who has run a business will realise, however, the first 5 per cent of savings is the easiest to achieve; it gets tougher as you cut in.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 2 September 2025
Craig Hoy
Good morning, cabinet secretary. The convener has identified a number of the very real risks that run through the fiscal delivery plan. However, obviously, you are setting significant store on making savings of £2 billion—£1 billion through the public service reform targets that were set out by Ivan McKee on 19 June. When he made his statement to the Parliament, he said that his plan was “rooted in realism”, but
“not in a headline-grabbing way that simply throws out random targets”.—[Official Report, 19 June 2025; c57.]
You will be aware that we have received, through a freedom of information request, a significant body of paperwork relating to the preparations for that announcement. One key element that stands out is that there were significant concerns among both the civil servants and your Cabinet colleagues about the ability to achieve that £1 billion. I draw your attention to paragraph 17 on page 3 of a document that we received, which was dated 22 May, from the directorate for public service reform. It says:
“We have set out ... that there is not a specific breakdown of the £1 billion target and there is an element of risk in this approach.”
Was that “rooted in realism” or simply written on the back of a fag packet?