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: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
I can certainly attest to that because, a few times in the past few years, I have turned up in my Mazda Bongo to find that there is nowhere to park it and skiing is off because of the weather. After a very long drive up there, we just drove back home again. That is probably the experience of many people, particularly in the domestic market. When people make the effort to go up there in the morning when the weather is posted as being okay, and it takes a turn and the cafe shuts really early, which it did when I turned up, there is just nothing else to do. We all left. How do you convince people like that to come back?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
That is helpful, and it is good to hear. I hope that word of mouth will help to propagate traffic.
I have one final question about the long-term vision, and it might be a joint question for you and HIE. Investment has been very much piecemeal, for obvious reasons, because of the remediation works and adding bits to the resorts to improve it, such as car parking, the potential toboggan run and other improvements. It does not sound like a long-term strategy with a big-ticket ask at the top of it. What is the long-term plan? What sort of numbers are you looking at for long-term investment to ensure that, in 20 to 30 years, there is still a buoyant, self-sufficient, popular and busy resort?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
I presume that you will be knocking on ministers’ doors next year, whoever forms the Government.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Is it correct that eight of the cycle 1 schemes are not going ahead?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
That was helpful clarification. It makes sense that, where very few spades went in the ground, the costs in question were associated with the development, planning and design of the schemes that did not come to fruition. I am sure that local communities will reflect on that.
If the 40 projects that were originally planned had been delivered ahead of significant storm events, would those events have had less impact or could any of the substantial damage that communities faced been avoided had those schemes been in place? Has any analysis been done of that?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
That is a short timescale.
Auditor General, your report is quite stark in its findings. It states explicitly that money that was supposed to go towards funding flooding schemes was redirected by councils. Was that a Scottish Government decision or a COSLA decision, or did individual councils take decisions to divert money from flooding to, for example, settle local government pay settlements? I think that you alluded to that. In other words, who made the decisions to divert that money away from vital flooding schemes?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
Let me bring you back to some financial questions. Mr Black, you have stated three times over the course of this morning—it is also in your written submission—that you are keen to stress that Balfour Beatty has absorbed the cost of the remediation work on the funicular. I presume that Balfour Beatty has not sprouted a charitable arm. In what circumstances is it undertaking that work? Presumably, it was paid to do it—that is why you are telling us that.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
It was paid to do the job, and it is doing the job, but who paid for it? Where did the £18 million come from?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
You get the crux of my question, though. A huge chunk of public money has been paid to a private contractor to deliver the project and get it up to speed. It is clear that some work is still going on, although you say that it is minor rather than substantive. My point is that, as the Public Audit Committee, we are trying to work out what the overall potential liability to the public purse is.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 September 2025
Jamie Greene
I appreciate that, and thank you for the additional information.
In the light of the convener’s previous question, if the costs of starting afresh, rebuilding or building a new funicular were established, it sounds to me that the cost of doing the remediation was double the cost of putting in a new funicular. Who made the decision to remediate and why?
10:30