Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

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.

Searching by different views

The web version of the Official Report has three different views:

Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.

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.

Search by MSP

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.

Searching by keyword

There are two types of keyword search:

A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.

Combining search filters

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.

Searching by date

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:

Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
Last 6 months
Last 12 months
each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
All sessions
You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.

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.

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Christine Grahame

I know simply from my casework about the pressure on mental health services. It is a pressure that, in my 24 years as an MSP, I have not seen before. Although I wish that referrals could be accelerated, I recognise that the volume of referrals has risen. Several factors are causing unforeseen pressure on services. One is Covid. Another is the cost of living and inflation in energy and food bills, with inflation on the price of food reaching almost 19 per cent. Another is that people are more likely—and this is a good thing—to identify that they have a mental health problem. Both the Labour motion and the Tory amendment would have more credibility if they even referenced those factors.

I will start with the devastating fallout from Covid. On the situation in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, I received the following response from the chief executive of NHS Borders:

“Regrettably, the Community Mental Health Team were experiencing pressure from the Covid-19 backlog and the demand for the Neurodevelopmental Disorder assessments. As a result, NHS Borders are implementing the existing secondary care referral criteria. Therefore, only patients assessed as meeting level 4 (complex) will progress for assessment by the CMHT. This is in line with the National Autism Implementation Team recommendations”.

The Mental Health Foundation has said:

“National and localised ‘lockdowns’ ... removed the social connections and day to day support that significantly contribute to positive mental health and happiness.”

I move on to inequality. Of course, that takes me on to inflation, which is currently over 10 per cent generally, with food price inflation still running at over 19 per cent—those are Office for National Statistics figures. Added to that is the cost of heating and credit cards, never mind mortgages. The Tories’ cost of living crisis means that the poorest and most vulnerable in our society are more likely to experience poorer mental and physical wellbeing, lower life satisfaction and feelings of loneliness. That is supported by new research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which states:

“More than a quarter of adults in Scotland have accessed the NHS due to the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on their mental or physical health.”

That is further confirmed by the findings of See Me Scotland, which in February found that 59 per cent of people in Scotland say that the cost of living crisis is impacting on their mental health. A poll carried out for the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland found that 52 per cent of Scots are concerned about the impact of rising prices on their mental health. There was no mention of that from any of the Conservative speakers in the debate.

The impact of the pandemic was bad enough, especially for those who were already vulnerable, but it has been compounded by the highest inflation rates in generations. What is welcome, but challenging, is the gradual erosion of the stigmatisation of mental health issues. More people are therefore coming forward for assessment in the first instance, which is excellent. However, it is no wonder that, in that context, demands are high and pressures are unparalleled. The Opposition parties should at the very least acknowledge that and, in the case of the Tories, they should admit a modicum of responsibility, given the cost of living crisis.

16:42