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 1067 contributions
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
Could that have a significant impact on your case load?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
Good morning. I would like to explore the backlog and the case load numbers. You say that you have seen the number of cases reducing. Can you give us a sense of why that is? Do you anticipate that that will continue to be the case?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
I was going to ask about complexity. Clearly, such cases bump into the cost restriction at some point, which I suppose puts a limit on how complex cases can get before they breach that.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
Okay—I understand.
Mr Hamilton, you mentioned redefining the process. I think that there is a different triage process and so on. It is good to hear all that. More work on proactive release of information in a standardised form might help, so I assume that that is on your agenda, but will you confirm that that is the case?
Also, to what extent are you looking at new technology, such as artificial intelligence and so on, to speed up the process?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
It is interesting that you can see a culture. I suspect that Stephen Kerr will jump on that, so I will leave it to him to do so.
Is there any calculation or sense of how much the whole process of pulling information together for FOIs costs across the public sector?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2024
Ivan McKee
I am sorry, but are you saying that the cost number does not include all the costs?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 20 February 2024
Ivan McKee
No, it is okay.
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2024
Ivan McKee
I seek clarification on that point, convener. You described a process whereby a CPG decides that it wishes to cease to be a CPG. Is there a process whereby, in some circumstances, the committee may decide that it wishes to derecognise a CPG, even if that CPG has not volunteered to be derecognised?
Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2024
Ivan McKee
I have a few comments. First, I thank the clerks for the huge amount of work that has gone into pulling together this comprehensive document, which outlines the performance or otherwise of various CPGs. To be frank, CPGs are hugely fundamental to the Parliament, because they enable members of the public and interest groups to engage with parliamentarians and visit the Parliament building fairly regularly. The number of CPGs will be the number that can be supported, because that represents thousands of people coming into Parliament regularly, which is absolutely to be encouraged.
Having said that, I think that, to be frank, people who operate CPGs should be able to meet the requirements, which are not especially onerous with regard to the number of meetings, the number of members involved, producing minutes and so on.
It might be interesting to consider having a more formal process for derecognising CPGs in extremis and potentially having an intermediate step. I understand that the clerks write to conveners, but that is just an email in the background. We could have a process so that, when we recognise that a CPG is struggling, that is made public knowledge on the website, so that members of the CPG recognise that there is an issue and step forward to do work to reinvigorate the group. It would be unfair simply to get notification one day that a CPG no longer existed without having had the opportunity to engage and seek parliamentary support.
There could be an intermediate step that formally recognised the difficulty and then a derecognition step. Perhaps it would be helpful to come back to this in three months, rather than leaving it to once a year. Although 76 CPGs have done absolutely everything that has been asked of them, a number have not, and it would be remiss of us not to look at that further in short order.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 6 February 2024
Ivan McKee
That is fine.
I will move on. In terms of the effect on the industry, I have a couple of data points on which I again seek clarification, as we will be speaking about those with our next panel.
A study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies says that there are £383 million of “windfall gains” from MUP to the alcohol sector a year. I am not sure whether that is increased revenue, increased profit, net profit or something else. There is also the Sheffield modelling, which gives a figure of £140 million, which is a revenue number. Clearly, that will not translate through to profit.
I do not know whether anyone on the panel is on top of any of those numbers. If not, it is not a problem.