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 1737 contributions
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Right. Has anyone who has run a board that has had such high-level escalation or intervention moved to another board?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Yes, please check that and write to us.
We talked a little bit in the earlier session about the importance of the role of the non-executive board in holding the executive to account in any public body or organisation. If someone has been part and parcel of that organisation for a long period of time, although I can see that they may bring knowledge and experience of that sector to their non-exec role, are they simply too close to the system and the people involved in it to be able to hold them properly to account in terms of governance arrangements?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Yes, we heard some good examples of that as well, which is great. There is, however, an issue. There is a 25 per cent failure rate in the first round of recruitment at the highest level. That is one in four vacancies where there is a failure to appoint a candidate. That is an extremely high number relative to other parts of the public sector. Why is it so bad?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 24 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Yes, the aspiring chairs programme was mentioned and it seems to be reaping some degree of success as a pipeline generating new entrants and bringing people up the chain. That is particularly helpful.
However, the issues of time commitment and remuneration were first brought up in the 2021 survey. We are four years on from that. Those are not new issues, yet many boards are still struggling.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
It sounds as though you undertook an interesting due diligence process. What is the shelf life of the funicular once it is fully remediated? When will you have to start thinking about replacement?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
I will begin with a general question. The cycle 1 flood schemes were identified 10 years ago. There were 40 schemes in the plan, the cost of delivering which was estimated to be around £350 million at the time. You now estimate that cost to be around £1 billion, which is a lot of money. Is that your estimate of how much it would cost to deliver the 40 schemes if they were to be delivered in full today, or is that the amount that you understand that the Government has now allocated to their completion? It is a lot of money.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
What about contractors? I cannot get my head around how such a large sum of money has not gone on building flood defences or supporting communities. That is my point.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Understood. I am not passing comment on the decision that was made; I simply want to understand the diligence process by which those decisions are made. I know for sure that, if I lived in a community that had been ravaged by a flood, and a defence scheme should have been there but was not, and I then discovered that the local council had diverted money to cover other shortfalls, I would not be an overly happy resident. I am sure that many people are not happy about that.
I point to exhibit 7 in your report, which is a table. It is clear that the Scottish Government is spending significant amounts of money on the issue of flooding, and that that has increased since 2017. In that year, the figure was £42 million, and councils also spent £42 million on the issue. In 2023-24, which is the last year in the table, that figure had increased to £60 million. However, the same graph shows that councils’ expenditure was nearer £80 million, so there is a delta of nearly £20 million there. How did that come about? Do you know whether that shortfall was made up or covered by councils dipping into other parts of their budgets to fund that difference?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
So, it will cover anything over £18 million—is that correct?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
It is important; we are talking about public money.