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 1219 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
I am not disagreeing with what has been said, because we do need to ask questions, to see whether the Government can shine any light on the issue. The second last paragraph says that the SCTS will
“make information available on their webpages”,
which will include costs and information on how to get transcripts. Although I think that that is a move forward, questions still need to be asked.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
Good morning. For clarity, Ms Medhurst, how long has the Prison Service been managing transgender prisoners in Scotland?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
I am conscious of time. Would newly remanded prisoners who go to the establishment of their birth gender be segregated as a matter of course or could they be segregated if they requested it? I am thinking about their human rights in a situation where they have not been convicted of anything.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
I agree with Jamie Greene, in particular regarding paragraph 16, which states that
“The SPF raises a concern that the SPA bases its oversight on evidence provided by Police Scotland”,
and that the SPF does not have much input. I agree that we should take up that point.
I do not agree so much with Jamie Greene’s first point about going back to Police Scotland. We have been there, and Police Scotland knows that we are not happy with the response, as does the SPA. The SPA governs Police Scotland, so the onus is on the SPA to get this right for the police and for us, and to give us the information.
Paragraph 11 states:
“In response to the Committee’s request, the SPA undertook an urgent review of the number of cases where officers and staff retired due to mental ill health ... The SPA confirms in their response that additional resources have been assigned and are having a positive impact on reducing the number of officers awaiting approval”.
We have had no update on that urgent review, so we do not know what the outcome was.
Paragraph 11 goes on to note that
“The SPA’s People Committee is to consider the outcomes of the review at its meeting of 28 February”.
It might be timely, therefore, for us to contact the SPA and ask what the outcome of the review was. I am not sure of the value of going back to Police Scotland, because I think that we will just get the same response.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
For clarification, you talked about setting up the operating procedure. In the interim period, what would happen to a newly remanded or convicted transgender prisoner? Would they go to an establishment for prisoners of their birth gender?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 22 February 2023
Rona Mackay
In the lessons learned review, you said that
“newly convicted or remanded transgender prisoners will initially be placed in an establishment commensurate with their birth gender.”
Is there a timescale on that? Does the individual have to appeal to be moved to a different prison?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Rona Mackay
I have a supplementary question. I understand what Jamie Greene is saying, but I think that he is overthinking it a wee bit.
We would need to see the Official Report, but what was said in the committee’s report could have been taken out of context, slightly. It is perfectly reasonable for the cabinet secretary to say that those are operational matters and that he would not take control of them. I think that that is what it is about, but I appreciate that Jamie would like more information about where the money will go. However, that is surely up to the chief constable.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 8 February 2023
Rona Mackay
I agree with all the points that have been made. I am really pleased about the multiyear funding for victims services.
I am also pleased that the modernisation of the prison estate and the new female prison will go ahead. Jamie Greene asks whether it is magic cash or new money. I do not know whether it is either of those but, to be honest, the fact that it will happen is the main thing, from my point of view.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 February 2023
Rona Mackay
That is important. It is about getting out the message of reassurance because, at first glance, the perception is that the red flag that I mentioned and the safety net are being removed, but, when you drill down into it, you see that that is not the case. That is helpful. Thank you very much.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 1 February 2023
Rona Mackay
Good morning, cabinet secretary. I will ask you, as I have asked practically all our witnesses on the bill, about section 23D of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. You spoke about that in your opening statement. I was having difficulty understanding the support for the removal of that section, but after our session with our adviser earlier this morning, I am much clearer about it. He described section 23D as a kind of red flag that is used as a marker. He also said that if bail was refused under sections 23B and 23C, section 23D would be almost redundant.
I put it to our adviser that the message going out to women’s organisations, and to domestic abuse victims in particular, was not a good one and that their perception of the removal of that section would not be good. You spoke about one safety test being applied with the removal of section 23D. Would one safety test apply to the unique nature of domestic abuse, where there is individual risk and not necessarily public risk? I wish to reflect the concerns that there are around the issue.