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 1570 contributions
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
What are you doing to ensure that committees such as the Public Audit Committee, as well as Audit Scotland and other independent bodies, have access to information for the purposes of transparency and accountability, so that we can evaluate value for public money and not be presented with lots of black pages?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
Presumably, on top of the £35 million, there will still be the on-going monthly operational costs to keep the yard running, which include staffing costs and so on. Is that in addition to the extra capital that has been asked for? How much is that?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
It is unfortunate that it spent that money and did not get the contracts.
Did anyone in the Scottish Government advise ministers to directly award any of those contracts? For example, presumably it would have been in the interests of the yard to be given the small vessel replacement programme work. Did SCAD offer any advice to ministers about whether they should directly award that work and, if so, what was the ministers’ response?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
Is that not strange, though? Would SCAD not want the yard to get work? Did you not make representations either to CMAL or to the transport division of the Scottish Government?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
You talk about continuity and stability, but the yard is on its fourth chief executive since it was nationalised; that is not exactly stability.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 21 May 2025
Jamie Greene
I have a lot of ground to cover, so I will try to rattle through it. I am sorry if I revisit earlier subjects—that is just the nature of questions.
I have some unanswered questions on Ferguson Marine. Has anyone in the Scottish Government, particularly in your divisions, asked Ferguson Marine what exactly it needs £35 million for?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 14 May 2025
Jamie Greene
One thing that we have not gone into great detail on is satisfaction. You talked earlier about the health and care experience survey for 2023-24, which is detailed in exhibit 5. I found that to be one of the more shocking graphs in your report. Every single metric on which people were questioned in 2017-18 and again six years later—with the same set of questions—saw a decline in satisfaction, and some of those declines were quite stark. The starkest decline was in people’s overall rating of their care experience as good or excellent. It was at 69 per cent in 2023-24, having gone down by 14 percentage points in just six years. Two thirds of people believe that they are getting a good service, but the other third do not. That is pretty shocking.
Did anything that came out of that survey jump out at you as being an area of concern?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 14 May 2025
Jamie Greene
I will ask a question that may be more controversial. Do you think that there should be a top-down complete change to the system—in other words, to the GMS contract? BMA Scotland and those who represent GP practitioners believe that GPs are not getting paid enough for the work that they do. Their workload is increasing and they are having to take on ever more patients. On the other side of the phone, patient satisfaction is decreasing, and the public are not happy with the output. Is the whole system broken? Is the private practice model actually working in Scotland?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 14 May 2025
Jamie Greene
Is that good or bad, though? Is it a consolidation—is it better to have fewer, bigger practices? It is quite hard to tell what that number means. On the face of it, it looks like it is poor, because it means that there are fewer practices, and therefore there is much less local access to a GP.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 14 May 2025
Jamie Greene
We have talked about data and the lack of it, but there are things that we know and that have been made clear to us. I would like to look at two pieces of data: one is the ratio of GPs to population and the other is the number of GP practices in Scotland.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the number of practices has fallen considerably over the past 10 years. On the patient per whole-time equivalent GP ratio—perhaps we can clarify for the benefit of people watching that that ratio is different from the GP head count; it is the number of patients that a GP has on average—the Scottish Government often claims that WTE GP to patient ratio is smaller in Scotland than elsewhere and that therefore people have easier access to a GP in Scotland than in other parts of the UK. However, your analysis seems to suggest that the WTE GP to patient ratio has decreased over many years, by some margin. It used to be 1,515 patients per WTE GP and it is now 1,735 patients per WTE GP. It is no wonder that people cannot get an appointment at 8 o’clock to see their GP; far more people are registered with GPs.