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 567 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
Yes, thank you very much.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
Your point is more about the consequences, which you think would run contrary to people’s human rights, rather than about the provisions of the bill per se.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
That is helpful to understand. Clearly, we will have the opportunity to ask questions about that, just as I am asking questions about the poll that Lynsey Walton’s evidence cites.
I have one final question, because it is important to ask the same question of panel 2 as I did of panel 1. It goes back to the duty to provide assistance and support to those seeking to leave prostitution and sex work. I think that all the people on the panel have said that they support that provision. What would that support look like? Could it be provided on a non-statutory basis?
11:45Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
I do not know whether Amanda Jane or Diane might have anything to add to that. It is okay if you do not.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
When speaking with the previous panel, I promised to put my question about common ground to the second panel. Those whom we heard from on panel 1 are in favour of the bill and you oppose it. Do you perceive there to be any common ground between you?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
That would be helpful.
I have another question—
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
Not at all.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
Thank you. Liam Kerr covered much of the territory that I wanted to cover around making sure that we protect those who are involved in prostitution and sex work against forms of violence, and I was going to draw on everyone’s submissions in doing so. However, my next two questions are specifically about the written evidence that Lynsey Walton has provided. Paragraph 180 of the policy memorandum for the bill sets out that the approach
“would ensure that Scotland meets its obligations under international and European human rights law”.
I was struck by your evidence, which says that the bill
“is contrary to international human rights standards”.
Those are two polar opposite views, and I am intrigued to understand why you take your particular view.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
I take your point about the existing legislation that deals with areas of human rights concern, but you said in your submission that the bill is
“contrary to international human rights standards”.
Will you expand on that?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 8 October 2025
Jamie Hepburn
Okay. That is useful to understand.
Lynsey, your written evidence states that there is
“strong evidence that the Scottish public oppose the proposed measure to outlaw the purchase of sex.”
You talk about opinion polling that you commissioned involving more than 1,000 Scottish adults in May 2024. You state:
“The results showed that 69% of Scots say the Scottish Government should focus on protecting the health and safety of sex workers, and providing support to people who want to leave the industry, compared to 14% who support the government passing new laws to prevent people exchanging sexual services for money.”
It is only fair to place on record that a poll out this week from the polling agency Find Out Now suggests that 68 per cent of people say that they back
“stronger laws against buying sex as a way of tackling pimping, organised crime and sex trafficking.”
I know that the questions in the polls are not precisely the same, but I want to place the results in context.
To go back to the poll that you commissioned, which YouGov undertook, were those two options mutually exclusive? I presume that some of the 14 per cent could also support what some of the 69 per cent said.