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 2597 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
Given that councils have said that demand will continue to increase—which is worrying, although they do not say at what rate—do they have a pipeline that they can look back at to see what sort of volumes will be coming down towards them? They must have something, otherwise they would not be saying that demand was going to continue to increase.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
I want to flip back to my previous question on the financial and resource pressures on councils. Do we have any idea how much it actually costs to run a tribunal?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
I suppose that the bottom line that I am trying to get to is this: is it actually cheaper, in all senses, to go down the mediation route rather than to go to tribunal? I am talking not just about the financial and resource costs for the council, but about the outcomes for the people who follow such a route.
10:30Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
I want to move on to a different aspect—the additional support needs tribunal. In paragraphs 42 to 44 of your briefing, you highlight that
“the number of parents and young people making applications to the Additional Support Needs Tribunal ... has increased by two-thirds”
between 2019-20 and 2023-24. That is a huge increase. It might be reflective of the increase in the number of people receiving ASL and disputes coming from that, but it is still a significant rise. What are the main factors that have contributed to that increase? After all, it must have had an impact on the financial resources of individual councils. How has that situation come about?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
Is this another case in which the data is collected differently by different local authorities, with the result that you cannot compare it and see whether you have a list of the additional support needs for one pupil, or is it simply the case that it is not done in some places?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Colin Beattie
But there must come a point at which there is a plateau. Unless demand hits 100 per cent, there must be a plateau somewhere at which it starts to level off.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 5 March 2025
Colin Beattie
Is that common or normal?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 5 March 2025
Colin Beattie
Thank you.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 5 March 2025
Colin Beattie
Could you confirm that you accept the Auditor General’s assertion that a more radical approach is needed?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 5 March 2025
Colin Beattie
I will leave the concept of radical to float out there for a bit and I will move on.
In the process of developing the 2024-25 Scottish budget, not a single portfolio accountable officer could provide an assurance that they would be able to fund their existing commitments with the initial allocations. That situation was eventually sorted out, but is it not fairly unique that not a single accountable officer was able to provide that assurance in the first instance?