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 1586 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
So, the £90.3 million does not include the £30.4 million?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
So, you will have fewer than 600 of those officers under the budget arrangement.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
I guess that communities want to have a connection with the local police officer. To what extent, in your model, do you think that there might be more connection with local communities, with a named police officer, for instance? One of my criticisms of the centralisation is that Police Scotland feels like such a big organisation. When someone calls the police to find out what has happened following a crime that has been committed, the officer concerned will often not be on duty for ages. There is a disconnect there: that is where people feel a lack of confidence. Will the model bring some connection or some identity back?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
Good morning. I am clear about the reasons why you are taking this approach, so I will not go into that.
In response to Liam Kerr, you mentioned a reduction in the prison population due to the change to people having to serve only 40 per cent of their sentence. If you had the projected figure for what would happen if there were a further reduction to 30 per cent, that would be useful.
You said that there would be no supervision of people who were subject to early release. Could those prisoners be released even earlier on home detention curfew? Apologies if you have answered that before, but I just want to be clear. Will they still serve that 30 per cent of their sentence in prison, or are there any circumstances in which they could be in prison for even less time than that?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
It would be, because, as I have said in the chamber before, the public will find the proposal very difficult to accept and understand. I am not starting a different conversation about alternatives to custody in the longer term, because I support that notion. What we are talking about is trying to get the public’s head around someone who has been given a four-year sentence serving only whatever 30 per cent of that would be—maybe you could do the maths for me on that; it would be easier if I had said three years.
We need to be clear about how much of their sentence people are going to spend in jail. However, I think that the answer to my question is that some people might not even serve 30 per cent of their sentence in jail, if they meet the criteria. Would you agree that that is the difficult bit for the public to accept? Under the proposals, we are just not clear how much time people will spend in jail in every case.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
That is a relief.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
There have been court cases because of probationers being summarily dismissed. My issue is not general vetting but the proposed power. I raised the matter during the passage of the 2025 act, because I was never comfortable with it. The Scottish Police Federation thinks that the power could enable vetting to be used as an excuse to get rid of police officers and that the process should be more transparent. That is my only issue, but we have to ensure that the right route is in place.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
Yes. Thank you.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
There is a fine line to be drawn when it comes to the powers of police officers to use force in the course of law enforcement and an allegation of assault. Is that the sort of case that we are talking about or is it more varied?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Pauline McNeill
Do you think that the decision to change the corroboration rules should be reviewed because there is perhaps a much lower bar for an allegation of assault against a police officer that comes to the PIRC?