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 560 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Sue Webber
Ferguson Marine has stated that it needs an additional £35 million to complete the late and massively over-budget MV Glen Rosa, the total cost of which is now estimated to be a staggering £185 million—nearly four times the original contract price. Will the cabinet secretary guarantee that that will be the final payment that taxpayers will have to make to complete the vessel? What discussions have she and her ministerial colleagues had with Ferguson Marine to ensure that Scottish taxpayers are not, again, placed on the hook to deliver the vessel?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 June 2025
Sue Webber
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the finance secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the allocation of any additional funding to meet the cost increases for MV Glen Rosa that were recently announced by Ferguson Marine. (S6O-04781)
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Sue Webber
Do you believe, cabinet secretary, that it is fair that the Green Party has hijacked that process?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Sue Webber
Ninety-seven per cent of the objections have been identified as coming from Green Party sources, but only 12 per cent of the Lothian population voted for that party at that point. Do you think that it is fair—
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Sue Webber
You caught me unawares, Deputy Presiding Officer. I was clapping vociferously, not for Ms Grahame’s retirement, but for wanting to get a decision on Sheriffhall.
I thank my colleague, Miles Briggs, for bringing the debate to the chamber. Sheriffhall roundabout has been a long-standing problem, yet it remains neglected by SNP ministers, after more than 15 years and millions of pounds spent on planning.
The Sheriffhall roundabout has cost Lothian residents countless hours in traffic and millions of pounds. A much-needed upgrade to the notorious junction has been discussed since 2008, but there has been no tangible progress in that time, despite the £6 million that has been spent on consultants.
More than 75,000 vehicles use the bypass every day, and that figure is set to increase, given that Lothian has the fastest-growing population in Scotland and is forecast to account for 84 per cent of Scotland’s predicted population growth over the period to 2033. That includes Midlothian, East Lothian and all the local authority areas surrounding Edinburgh.
Under the SNP-Green Scottish Government, the project totally stalled. The fact is that this key piece of infrastructure brings the Edinburgh bypass to a standstill every rush hour, and if the junction were to be successfully upgraded, it would hugely benefit people across Edinburgh and the Lothian region.
It is only seven years since the Edinburgh city region deal was signed, with the support of all the local authorities and the Scottish and UK Governments. That deal is worth £1.6 billion, and the agreement should really accelerate economic growth and prosperity, but the one element that has been missing is the upgrading of the Sheriffhall junction.
As we have heard, a flyover solution was proposed by Transport Scotland, and it should be progressing. Designs for that much-needed flyover are available and funding has been put in place but, seven years on, we are no further forward, because the Scottish Government and the City of Edinburgh Council have been in thrall to the Green Party’s anti-car agenda.
A review of the project was ordered in 2020, when Edinburgh’s SNP-Labour administration was, frankly, drunk with power during lockdown and was blocking streets and narrowing roads in a hidden agenda to make driving as difficult as possible. Having already accepted the need for improvement in the city deal, the SNP Scottish Government then bent to the Green Party’s will by agreeing to the public inquiry in 2023.
Earlier this year, the Sheriffhall overarching objectors group—ShOO—got the Scottish Government to hold a public local inquiry, following the submission of 2,771 objections to the scheme’s draft orders. It has come to light that, according to Transport Scotland, a high proportion of those objections, which sparked the hearing, were submitted through the Scottish Green Party website. The resulting report was delivered to SNP ministers a year ago, and since then, there has been nothing, apart from the fact that we now know that £6.4 million has been spent on consultants to produce designs. We are no further forward.
In fact, Transport Scotland failed to appear at last week’s city region deal committee meeting to provide an essential update on the continued delay in progressing the Sheriffhall upgrade.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 10 June 2025
Sue Webber
They might well be watching online, working from home or something—I am not sure—but they should be here, because, frankly, they are at fault for causing the delay.
The delay is having a massive impact on the south-east of Scotland’s economy. It is impacting on 42,000 vehicles a day, with commuters being delayed an average of 30 minutes a day. As Christine Grahame rightly said, having cars spurting out those fumes is hardly green. After successive delays caused by the opposition of the Greens and the complacency of the SNP, it is time for the Government to commit to a deadline and a budget for the project before costs spiral further out of control.
My colleague Miles Briggs has launched an online petition calling for work to start without further delay, and I hope that it persuades the cabinet secretary to really get a move on. There is only one year left in this parliamentary session, Ms Hyslop, and I would be delighted if we were able to sign off by delivering something of genuine benefit to Edinburgh, the Lothians and the Borders.
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 May 2025
Sue Webber
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with cardiology patients, clinicians and other relevant stakeholders as part of the development of the recently published long-term conditions framework consultation. (S6O-04716)
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 28 May 2025
Sue Webber
Last week, British Heart Foundation Scotland published figures that showed that Scotland has seen the first sustained rise in heart disease deaths in a generation. We must halt that trend. Collaboration between everyone who is involved in tackling heart disease is crucial. The long-term conditions framework could result in a deprioritisation of conditions such as heart disease. Will the minister guarantee that collaboration will take place between those stakeholders and the Scottish Government to ensure that the 730,000 people in Scotland living with heart disease are not forgotten about?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Sue Webber
CalMac services have been pushed to the limit and, as we head into the summer months, islanders are being left at the whim of an ageing fleet thanks to last week’s announcement that the issue of the MV Glen Rosa will not be resolved until next year.
Now that a direct award has been made, what guarantees has the cabinet secretary received from CalMac, Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd and Ferguson Marine that the new contract will not result in the same poor level of service as the current one?
Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]
Meeting date: 22 May 2025
Sue Webber
To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it decided to make a direct award of the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services contract to CalMac. (S6O-04696)