Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
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.
Searching by different views
The web version of the Official Report has three different views:
- Report: this is the whole Official Report for a particular meeting of a committee or Parliament
- Item of business: this is each individual agenda item in an Official Report. For example, Portfolio Questions would be the item of business in a Meeting of the Parliament report
- Contribution: this is each time someone has made a spoken contribution to a meeting.
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.
Search by MSP
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.
Searching by keyword
There are two types of keyword search:
- A keyword search without quotation marks will look for every instance of each word used and rank the results by frequency and proximity. It will also include variants of the keywords using “porter stemming”. This is when the search looks for the “stem” of a word regardless of its ending. So, for example, a search for [salmon farm] will return each instance of “salmon” and each instance of “farm” as well as potentially including results for “farms”, “farmed” and “farming”.
- A keyword search with quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase used. So, for example, a search for “salmon farm” in quotation marks will only return instances of that exact phrase.
Combining search filters
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.
More complex keyword searches
It’s also possible to run basic Boolean searches. For example:
- a search for “salmon farm” AND “Loch Lomond” will return only results which include both exact phrases
- a search for “salmon farm” NOT “Loch Lomond” will return results for “salmon farm” but exclude results which also include “Loch Lomond”
- a search for “salmon farm” OR “Loch Lomond” will return all results for “salmon farm” and all results for “Loch Lomond” regardless of whether they appear together
Searching by date
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:
- Current session (all Official Reports since the current sessions started)
- Last 6 months
- Last 12 months
- each of the previous sessions of Parliament. (Selecting the information icon above the “Select a time period” menu will give you the exact dates for each session.)
- All sessions
- You can also choose to select a custom date range, although adding a Start or End date will mean the search automatically defaults to this option.
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.
Criathragan Hide all filters
Displaying 1957 contributions
|
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill
Meeting date: 16 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Do people use the same types of dogs for trail hunting as for rough shooting?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Given that I have lodged amendments that would increase the period for which someone must live in the acquired gender to the status quo, I believe not only that the current Scottish Government proposal of a three-month period is inadequate but that the absence of any reflection period could lead to young and distressed people rushing into life-changing decisions that they may later regret. That is especially true if it is coupled with medical alterations such as hormone or puberty blockers and surgery. Furthermore, a reflection period could prevent so-called bad-faith actors from taking advantage of the changes and intruding into single-sex spaces.
Weakening the provisions in the bill would make it even worse, so I cannot support amendments 87 to 89. However, I am happy to support amendment 141, because I believe that it is important that the Scottish Government reviews the period for which a trans person is required to live in the acquired gender. I know that Maggie Chapman wishes to reduce the period and I want to increase it, but I think that we can find common ground and agree that reviewing the evidence will allow the Scottish Government to make a more informed decision in future.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
My question is on a point of clarification. On 6 October, the committee agreed that interpretations of whether someone was living in the acquired gender could lead to reinforcement of gender stereotypes and that it would be unacceptable to enshrine that in law. Do you agree with that?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
To clarify, will that be in the guidance for the registrar general? Will there be a definition of what it means to live in an acquired gender?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Cabinet secretary, I am very supportive of Sarah Boyack’s amendment and I am disappointed that you have highlighted its inconsistencies, despite the fact that Sarah Boyack said at the outset that it is a generalised and probing amendment. I think that it could be complemented by giving the Scottish ministers a duty to report on some of the issues that Sarah Boyack is trying to raise. The amendment complements the reporting requirements that Christine Grahame is seeking to introduce, as well as the provisions on data collection. Normally, the Scottish ministers are responsible for data collection.
I therefore ask you to change your mind, cabinet secretary, and to work with the Conservatives and Labour to find something on which we can all agree. Quite frankly, the process has not had much cross-party consensus, but this is one area where I think that we can work together.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I remind the member that we had a free vote in our party.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
But that would not be in the bill.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Could I withdraw my vote on amendment 71? It was meant to be a yes. Is that possible? If not, I will just state that I supported it and that will be recorded in the Official Report. Sorry about that.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
On the basis of what Pam Duncan-Glancy said, I am sympathetic to amendment 126, and so is my colleague Pam Gosal. However, I want reassurance from the cabinet secretary. Are you expecting the registrar general to make a clinical judgment on whether a person is terminally ill, rather than a healthcare professional?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Meeting date: 15 November 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Amendment 26 seeks to retain the requirement to provide evidence to accompany an application for a GRC. It will specifically retain sections from the 2004 act to ensure that legitimate concerns of parents, young people and gender identity experts regarding the removal of safeguards are addressed. The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill would remove the requirement for medical evidence and would reduce the period for which applicants must live in their acquired gender before applying for a GRC from two years to three months. The Scottish Government wants to have a system of legal gender recognition that is based on statutory declaration rather than a gender dysphoria diagnosis.
Can the cabinet secretary cite evidence from other countries where the impact of reform has been evident from these emerging policies? Can she comment on the prediction that removing a gender dysphoria diagnosis will not extend GRCs to a much larger and more diverse group, including predatory men? How will vulnerable individuals be supported without medical support? How will undiagnosed conditions be picked up? What evidence does the Scottish Government have that dropping the requirement to provide medical evidence is best for everyone? Surely that stance is entirely subjective.
Finally, why does anyone without gender dysphoria need to change their sex in law? NHS guidance says:
“social transition should only be considered where the approach is necessary for the alleviation of, or prevention of, clinically significant distress or significant impairment in social functioning and the young person is fully able to comprehend the implications of affirming a social transition”.
Doctors caring for youngsters who are distressed about their gender have been told that it is not a neutral act to help them to transition socially by using their preferred new names and pronouns. The draft guidelines say that doctors should carefully explore underlying health problems, including mental ill health, amid concerns that the NHS is rushing children on to irreversible puberty blocker medication.
A significant proportion of children and young people who are concerned about or distressed by issues of gender incongruence experience co-existing mental health, neurodevelopmental and/or family or social complexities in their lives. A number of doctors, including Dr Antony Latham, the chair of the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics, Dr Anne Williams, the vice-chair, and Dr Calum MacKellar, the director of research, said:
“Unfortunately, the Stage 1 Report on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was published by the Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament on the 6 October 2022, has not sufficiently considered the evidence of mental disorders which are often present with gender dysphoria. As a result, the recommendations given by the majority of MSPs preparing the report are unsafe and should be rejected ... In summary, the majority position in the report from the Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee is unworthy of the high expectations of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people since it is unreasonable, unprofessional, and does not sufficiently address the biomedical evidence. Moreover, if the Scottish Parliament does accept the majority view of the Committee in removing the requirement of a medical opinion before gender transitioning takes place, this will ... lead to some young persons being harmed”.
They also said:
“Moreover, research shows that many children with gender dysphoria have significant psychological and psychosocial vulnerabilities ... Thus, without a medical appraisal, it is very likely that many young persons may embark on risky life-changing procedures which they do not understand. This is all the more concerning since follow-up studies indicate that, overall, the distress experienced by young people affected by gender dysphoria disappears in about 85% of cases either before or early in puberty though the rates in ... studies vary widely.”
With regard to living in the acquired gender, three months is too short a time for such a life-changing decision, especially for 16 to 17-year-olds, who are going through significant changes, such as puberty, and doing exams. Furthermore, living in the acquired gender for just three months without a diagnosis of gender dysphoria might not be enough time for an individual to seek medical help or support with mental health, if needed.
It appears that many stakeholders are concerned that clarity is required on what living in an acquired gender even means. A period of two years provides sufficient safeguarding.
