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 1475 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 23 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Once the witnesses have had time to consider that, it might be useful for them to write to the committee. As Bob Doris said, if there are gaps in the information, it would be useful to know that.
The turnout for the election was the highest of any Scottish Parliament election to date. Why was there that increase?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
I am slightly conscious of the time, so I will jump to Alexander Stewart.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Absolutely. I have spoken to the clerk about my role as the convener, and I have indicated to a number of CPGs that I will not take part in them simply because of that role. That is not a requirement; it is just something that I feel would be beneficial, so that CPGs understand that there is an even-handedness.
Attendance at, and membership of, a CPG by any member of this committee is perfectly fine. I think that it is good practice to point out—exactly as you have, Paul—when you have a specific interest in something that is before us, but that certainly does not preclude your involvement in the discussion.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
I just want to get an answer on that. Are you saying that you are not aware of a situation in which a committee has said no to a proposed appointment?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Are you confident that the amended code will facilitate that if the intention is there?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
I thank Ian Bruce for joining us. Ian is the acting Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland. If it is all right with you, Ian, given that we have already had the pleasure of talking to you and reading through your report, I would like to go straight to questions from members, two of whom join us remotely. Members who have any follow-up questions should indicate that to me and we can take it from there.
The first question comes from Bob Doris. I am not sure whether he can hear us. Are you all right, Bob?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Thank you. That has been raised by a number of people as a fine example of how the process should work. You are right to put it on the record.
I now turn to Alexander Stewart—thank you for your patience, Alexander.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Given the time, I will push for a yes or no answer on this. There are clearly changes in the way that you are reporting, through the contents of the annual reports and the publication of your minutes. We are not going to lose any information that was previously reported in a way that means that trends are no longer trackable over a period of time, are we?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Agenda item 3 is on cross-party groups. We are asked to consider a change of purpose for the proposed cross-party group on independent convenience stores.
Paragraph 40 of section 6 of the code of conduct requires that any proposal to change the purpose of a group must be drawn to the attention of the committee, and the committee can then decide whether the group should be accorded recognition. Paragraph 6 of the clerk’s paper sets out the purpose of the group in session 5, and paragraph 7 sets out the proposed new purpose. There has been a change, and I am very grateful to Gordon MacDonald, who is the convener of the group, for providing an explanation for the change, which is set out on page 8 of the paper.
Before I invite comments, I want to float a challenge that I see developing. In setting out its purpose, the cross-party group stated various facts, and those facts have now changed. As a result of that, the convener has—rightly—written to us to say that things have changed and, therefore, the group’s purpose needs to come back before the committee. I think that it would be beneficial to discuss whether, going forward, we should provide more guidance on that aspect of setting up a cross-party group, to prevent a factual change—be it in the number of people who visit an area, the produce that is landed somewhere or even a style or fashion—requiring the matter to come back before the committee, for discussion of the reasons why the MSPs have formed the group, and whether the purpose of a CPG should be set at a higher level.
I invite comments on the application that sits before us on the change of purpose.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 9 September 2021
Martin Whitfield
Absolutely. That was very succinctly put.
Is there any desire among committee members not to allow the CPG to reregister? I see no suggestion of that, so I formally ask whether members agree that the CPG on independent convenience stores should still be accorded recognition with its new purpose.
Members indicated agreement.