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 415 contributions
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
One of the ideas that the UK Government appears to have floated in briefing certain parts of the press to report where it might be going with this is directly relevant to devolved responsibilities. It is around access to the national health service: if there was a youth mobility scheme, it would involve big up-front fees for the participants to access healthcare. If that was the way the UK Government went—if that was what it wanted to achieve—it would require a degree of negotiation with the Scottish Government around its devolved responsibilities.
I seek your assurance that the Scottish Government’s position will not be to commoditise access to healthcare in that way and that the Scottish Government would always argue against up-front fees for young people who are being welcomed to this country to be able to access healthcare?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
Thank you, convener. I will take as an example youth mobility, which you have touched on briefly, to understand how the process is working. We have seen conflicting news reports in recent weeks about whether the UK Government is changing or preparing to change its position on a youth mobility scheme. It is no great secret that I would like a maximal answer to that. I think the loss of freedom of movement is tragic. It is bad for our economy and society and there is a basic injustice in the fact that a generation of people who enjoyed freedom of movement have deprived the younger generation of that freedom.
However, in reality we are likely to see, if anything, a more modest change than the full restoration of the freedom of movement. Is the UK Government actively engaging the Scottish Government and other Governments within the UK in discussions on youth mobility? I hear support for it from the Scottish Government. We know that the Welsh Government has tried to make progress on it and wants to do more. We hear employers, trade unions and economists calling for it. The range of voices seeking a serious youth mobility scheme is broad and diverse and it seems as though the only voice in the room that is unwilling to say where it is going to go with this is the UK Government’s. Is the decision about where the UK should go being reached collectively, with the voice of the Scottish Government and other Scottish voices being heard, or not?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
If I can move on to a practical example—
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
The point about hydrogen infrastructure is certainly relevant, although it is perhaps outwith the scope of this inquiry. If the cabinet secretary could give us in writing any further update on the status of the work on ETS alignment, that would be helpful.
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
I am asking not whether you know what the UK Government really wants yet, but whether, as the UK Government determines what it wants, something akin to a co-decision-making process between the Governments of the UK is emerging. Are you in the position of lobbying someone else who will make the decision, or is there a process of deciding together what our shared priorities are?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
Is there an informal approach that seeks to achieve that, or is the process fundamentally unchanged?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
Thank you.
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
I want to move on to another topic before we finish. Earlier in the second half of this inquiry, before we got deep into the youth mobility issues, we heard some evidence about energy issues. Could you reflect on that and, in particular, on the emissions trading scheme? It is an area where there is some co-decision-making, because the ETS is not wholly reserved—the Scottish Government is represented on an authority that makes some decisions.
We heard some evidence suggesting that, unless there is alignment between the UK ETS and the EU ETS, there will be an impact, from January next year, on businesses trading in and out of the EU. What is the Scottish Government’s position on that, and what is the status of that work? Also, is there a concern that, if a trade agreement was reached with a far-right US regime that promoted climate denial conspiracy theories, which would clearly not be likely to include a carbon price in products entering the UK market, there could be harmful impacts from that?
11:00Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
That is what you described as the moving target problem. Someone made a comment a few minutes ago that was relevant to that aspect, which was that the EU’s approach seems to be grounded in how AI is deployed in specific contexts, but that changes all the time. If we regulate for particular purposes, an AI system designed for one purpose may end up being trained for a completely different purpose and then used or reused for other purposes altogether, so even the EU’s approach to regulation is not hitting the mark. Is that fair?
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee
Meeting date: 13 March 2025
Patrick Harvie
All right—thank you.