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 1227 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
Have we lost James Chalmers, or is he still with us?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
My final question is for anyone, but I should ask you first, Simon Di Rollo, as you have a different perspective on the proposal for single-judge trials.
Given what has been said about the experiences that victims might have in front of a single judge, notwithstanding the fact that you might prefer a panel of judges—we are talking about there being no jury—would there be a need for single-judge trials and a specialist court? If a specialist court is about trauma-informed practice and making sure that the jury understands that there are myths about the crime of rape, do we need a specialist court and a single-judge arrangement? It seems to me that one might cancel out the other.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
Can I stop you there? I am trying to get this straight in my head. That is a different question. How juries are directed or trained is an entirely different measure as to the outcome. A single-judge pilot is quite a different measure. Is that right?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
That was very helpful.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
Thank you.
In your submission, you talk about something that has not been mentioned until now—the use of pre-recorded evidence under section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
I think that the suggestion is that that provision is being used more readily in Scotland than it used to be, and it seems to be going well. It gives victims and witnesses the opportunity to give evidence outwith court. Does your evidence suggest that we should look at whether that is impacting on conviction rates? You seem to be saying that, where pre-recorded evidence is used under section 28 of the 1999 act in England and Wales, it has an impact on conviction rates. Is that right?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
I understand that, but as one of the parameters is to ascertain the effectiveness of the change, there must be one or two benchmark measures. I am struggling to see what they would be.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
Good morning, Professor Thomas. My first set of questions are to you. In your submission—this is on page 9 of committee paper CJ/S6/24/4/1—you talk about why there appear to be substantial differences between England and Wales and Scotland in both jury trial outcomes in rape cases and juror attitudes. You have already explored that with the committee, but I want to focus on how you have qualified that. You say in your submission:
“there is a lack of clarity in Scotland about jury conviction rates.”
Am I correct in saying that, because we do not have clarity on the conviction rates, it is very difficult to come to a determination on which of the two factors results in that apparent difference, or are you suggesting that you would not really expect to see substantial differences between the two systems?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
However, the two issues that you have brought to the committee are the lack of clarity on conviction rates and your concerns about our drawing conclusions without any baseline knowledge of how juries actually work. Would that be fair?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 24 January 2024
Pauline McNeill
Would you see objections from the profession if, to change the experience of victims, it would be a requirement for the victim to be able to speak to those legal representatives—however it is legislated for?