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 2443 contributions
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Bryan, would you like to comment on the situation in the hospitality sector?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Ruth Boyle, is there anything that the Scottish Government should do that it is not doing now to improve the situation in respect to harassment?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Okay. Martin—would you like to comment? Bear in mind that nobody likes to pay taxes—this is a question of how we collect the taxes—and that Governments everywhere are under pressure on their revenues.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Can I ask Maxine Smedley how non-domestic rates should be reformed? If that is the correct route to go down, how would you see it happening? There are obviously difficulties in having an turnover tax in relation to retail. Equally, a lot of people would argue that a property-based tax of some form is still the fairest. Maxine, how do you see it going?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Paul, do you want to quickly comment on that?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 27 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Is that across the UK or just in Scotland?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 21 April 2022
Colin Beattie
In effect, your report has not addressed the impact of contractor failure—I do not see that in your report. The Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee certainly raised the flag, so I would have thought that it would have been a priority to look at that issue. It is our public money that has been paid out to the company and, according to the evidence that has been given to this committee, it has not been paid out in the manner that it should have been. It has been paid out by CMAL, on the advice of its lawyers, according to the contract.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 21 April 2022
Colin Beattie
Some very strong statements are made in the report, most particularly in paragraph 160, which says that
“there is strong evidence that the contractor deliberately proceeded to construct specific sections of the vessel either out of sequence or not according to the proper specification purely as a means of triggering milestone payments on the contract.”
Evidence is given in paragraph 157 that work was carried out
“either incorrectly or out of sequence purely in order to trigger payments against the contract”.
Interestingly, too, paragraph 158 cites evidence that
“invoices presented were rejected on the basis they related to other projects”.
Given the committee’s evidence, it seems clear that it had great concerns about the contractor.
Paragraph 153 also highlights evidence that CMAL’s lawyers “advised” that it
“had to make the payments”—[Official Report, Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, 11 March 2020; c 50.]
that were called for, because that was in the contract and it did not want to break the contract. Moreover, on subcontractors, paragraph 154 cites the statement that
“Ferguson’s deliberately slowed down some of that subcontracting.”—[Official Report, Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, 5 February 2020; c 11.]
Maybe I have missed something, but I do not see anything in your report that addresses that issue directly. After all, this is very serious indeed. If the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s conclusion is correct, the question, then, is: what action needs to be taken?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 21 April 2022
Colin Beattie
My simple question to you is: where did all the money that was paid in go? What was it spent on? It was not in the yard when the yard was nationalised.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 21 April 2022
Colin Beattie
There just seems to be such a big and fundamental gap in the overall picture. I am relying on the good work of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, but I do not see where its work on the issue has been built on in Audit Scotland’s report in order to bring out that critical part of the picture. We can all argue about the contract—a huge amount of documentation has been online for some time in connection to that—but how will we address the issue of the failure of the contractor? That question mark is still sitting there.
In response to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s report, the Minister for Energy, Connectivity and the Islands highlighted that he felt that even that report did not reflect in full the
“contribution of the contractor’s non-performance, contract management and financial management, described in independent evidence”.
Why are we being so precious about this? If there is evidence that points to non-performance by the contractor that has contributed to charges on the public purse, and that applications for funding have not been made in the correct way, that should all be brought out and highlighted.
11:00