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 1957 contributions
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 1 June 2022
Rachael Hamilton
I do not have the reference to the section, but it is in the bill. The bill prohibits the involvement of more than two dogs in an accepted activity, but it envisages that more than two dogs could be involved and that “reasonable steps” can then be taken to ensure that more than two dogs cannot come together “to form a pack”. I am talking about the bit about dogs coming together as an unintended consequence.
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 1 June 2022
Rachael Hamilton
There is a contradictory element in the bill. You are prohibiting the involvement of two dogs in an accepted activity but you envisage that more than two dogs could be involved. The important word there is “involved”. Would it be possible for you to explain what is understood by a dog being “involved in” an activity and why those provisions are contradictory?
Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee
Meeting date: 1 June 2022
Rachael Hamilton
That is okay.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Am I right in saying that Lucy Hunter Blackburn said that no alternatives to self-declaration had been explored?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Lucy Hunter Blackburn, you suggested that we should hear from someone from the Cass review.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Would Malcolm Clark like to come in?
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Kate Coleman, if there is anything that you want to add, I give you the opportunity.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
To be clear, are you talking about someone who has been convicted of rape and has a criminal record—
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
Therefore, there might be an unintended consequence in relation to someone who does not have a criminal conviction—I suppose that you might just say that that is life. How are vulnerable women protected in that circumstance? I am new to the committee today, but I have seen no evidence whatever that the false declaration issue has been looked at in the process.
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Meeting date: 31 May 2022
Rachael Hamilton
When I asked the members of the previous panel about the Cass review, which is now in its interim stage, they suggested that we invite Hilary Cass to give evidence on the lack of routine and consistent data collection, which means that it is not possible to accurately track outcomes for children and young people, or to define the service models and workforce needs that are required for a more dignified approach to service delivery.
Should the GRA reform that we are considering be paused until we hear such evidence, get those views and receive the review’s full report? As far as I can see, we have not looked at data gathering in relation to the bill and the implications of not having that sort of data collection in Scotland. Catherine, would you like to start?