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 1631 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
In that same paragraph, you say that savings—to use that term—have increased from around £15 million to more than £21 million in a short space of time. By default, there is an increase in the value of the activity, but that does not necessarily mean that there is an increase in fraudulent activity. It is just about the value.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I guess that where I am heading with all this is that what strikes me about the whole conversation this morning is that perhaps that is where there is a failing in the process. Dealing with that might help you to deal with the issue that you mention in your key messages and to move from saying that it is not clear whether fraud has increased to a position where you can take a more definitive view. Having done the work that identifies the savings and fed all that back to the bodies involved, you could let them do their thing in identifying what is fraud, what is valid and what is erroneous and where there are systems issues or manual issues, and then they could feed that back to you. You could then insert another section in future reports that says, “Having identified the savings, this is what we think the outcomes were.”
I appreciate that that would be an extra piece of work for you and that it might even be outside your statutory requirements, but would that extra piece of analysis give people more confidence in the value of the work that you do? Do you see where I am going?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
To be clear, is it your understanding that there is no clawback from local authorities or, indeed, any payments to local authorities from the DWP?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I presume, then, that the media article that I came across in my research ahead of today’s meeting was erroneous in claiming that Perth and Kinross Council is
“one of ... two UK local authorities which does not share ... electoral roll”
data
“with the National Fraud Initiative”.
Is that true, or is the article incorrect?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Okay. Perhaps that is something that we can follow up with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, for example, as the body that assists and represents a number of local authorities in Scotland.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Do you think that the industry is a bit behind the curve in that respect? Other people are already making extensive use of AI in their business processes.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Does Audit Scotland charge fees for that work?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Do any local authorities in Scotland not participate in the NFI?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
I was particularly struck by the second of the key messages on page 3 of your report. Perhaps I can draw your attention to the last sentence of that and ask you to explain or clarify a little bit what it means and why you have said it. In summary, you say:
“Overall, it is not clear whether underlying levels of fraud have increased since 2020/21.”
That flags up a point of concern for me, but I will give you an opportunity to clarify what you mean by that.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 26 September 2024
Jamie Greene
Do you add value to the work that in-house fraud teams do? I presume that the DWP has a massive fraud team, as does His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and other big bodies across the UK that manage large sums of money for large numbers of people. I presume that they have many people who sit in an office and look at fraud. What value does your small team add to any of that?