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 3261 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
So, you would be happy with the levy if it applied to more people. Should we just add the amount on to, for example, corporation tax, income tax or business rates?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
I accept that the developers do not like the levy, but we must find the money. Should we add it to business rates and all businesses would pay for it?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
That would add to the cost of collecting the levy.
As I understand it, the levy is to be based on floor area. Would it not be fairer to base it on value?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
Okay. I want to move on to one of the other witnesses.
Ms Douglas, it sounds like Ms Kell would like to put this off for ever and ever. You said that it was not “fair” that the decent developers should pay for the bad behaviour of bad developers or bad manufacturers. Surely, tax is always like that. I reckon that I am a decent person, I am law abiding, and I pay tax for the police to deal with the bad people. Is that not just how tax works?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
So, would you spread the levy out further? Would you still have a levy but spread it out more?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
Would the admin costs for that not be pretty horrific? Normally, we spend 1 per cent on admin for getting a tax, but this time we are up to about 10 per cent or thereabouts. If we go after every single manufacturer, the admin costs will be huge.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
Fair enough. I will try a different question. There is the suggestion that a development with a small number of units would not pay the levy. Say that somebody builds a £1 million house out in the countryside. Surely, they should be paying a levy for that.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
Ms Gardiner, that is a fourth witness who has made that argument—three made it earlier, and we will come back to Ms Johnson later. It sounds like an argument that, if the housing sector—or the building sector or whatever we call it—is struggling, it would be better for the money to come out of general taxation. That would also save us money—Revenue Scotland is going to spend something like £3.7 million in the first year, which is more than 10 per cent of the money that we would get from levy. It seems to me like a strong argument: forget the levy, let us just put it on income tax.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
You are not totally opposed to a levy, but maybe we should look at it in more detail.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
John Mason
I accept all that. The thing is, we have a problem. You are telling us what is wrong with the levy and you are suggesting that we make more exemptions and so on, but we still have to raise the money, as the convener was suggesting. Do you have any suggestions, or do you feel that it is not your job to suggest alternatives?