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 ˿ and committees will automatically update to show only the ˿ and committees which were current during that session. For example, if you select Session 1 you will be show a list of ˿ and committees from Session 1.
If you add a custom date range which crosses more than one session of Parliament, the lists of ˿ 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 3042 contributions
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
That is fine. We put that to the test with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman over the case of the women against state pension inequality, in which there was an ombudsman recommendation that the Government chose not to implement.
Can I go into a final area that is related to this? Setting aside the enforcement part, I will move on to regulation and adjudication. In some commissions, such as the Scottish Information Commissioner and the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, those seems to be combined. However, if we look at the Ethical Standards Commissioner and the Standards Commission for Scotland, there is a separation between regulation and adjudication in the Scottish landscape. Is that a unique example in your experience, or are there other instances where there is a separation between those two functions?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Okay. I have finished my questions, convener.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Dr Lamont, you also reflect on the difference between soft powers and hard powers. Does that help us to define the purpose of different commissions and commissioners? Alison Payne mentioned that the Scottish Commissioner for Children and Young People and the Scottish Information Commissioner might be interchangeable in some of the work that they do. However, the latter has certain powers of enforcement, whereas the former does not. Does any of you want to reflect on that?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Good morning. I am interested in finding out your views on language. How interchangeable are some of the terms that are used in the discussion about what purpose the different commissions and commissioners fulfil?
When we started this exercise, we were told that, typically, some commissions are regulatory and some deal with advocacy. Alison Payne, you have talked about advocacy and integrity commissions and commissioners. Ruth Lamont, you have talked about regulatory commissions but also about contested social needs commissioners and special interest commissioners. Dr Elliott, you have talked about developing a strategic state. Are those terms interchangeable or do they represent the different profiles, powers and purposes of different commissioners?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Does anybody else want to come in on that?
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Are you fairly clear which commissions and commissioners you put into each of those two categories? Based on what the commissioners said when we asked them how they define themselves, I am not sure that they are clear themselves.
SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 20 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Thank you. My final question is for Ian Elliott. How do you reconcile that kind of fragmentation, differentiation or right to be different with your call for a more “strategic state”?
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Richard Leonard
That leads us nicely on to Graham Simpson’s areas of questioning, which include budgets and the financial resourcing of additional support for learning, as well as, I am quite sure, some wider questions that he wants to put to you.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Agenda item 2 is consideration of a briefing prepared by the Auditor General for Scotland and the Accounts Commission on additional support for learning.
I welcome our witnesses. From Audit Scotland, we are joined by Stephen Boyle, the Auditor General for Scotland, Alison Cumming, executive director, performance audit and best value, and Yoshiko Gibo, senior auditor. I am pleased to say that we are also joined by a member of the Accounts Commission, Ruth MacLeod.
Before we turn to the questions, Auditor General, I invite you to make an opening statement.
Public Audit Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 19 March 2025
Richard Leonard
Stuart McMillan will be coming back in a bit later on, but before we leave the areas that he was asking about, I want to go back to a couple of the statistics in the briefing.
We have mentioned the deprivation factor—as you have said, 46 per cent of pupils who require additional support for learning come from the most deprived areas, whereas 27 per cent come from the least deprived areas—but you have also highlighted the difference between boys and girls. I found that very striking when I first read the briefing. You say that boys are 22 per cent more likely to need additional support for learning, are three times more likely than girls to be in the “risk of exclusion” category—I presume that that is for behavioural reasons, although I might be wrong in making that assumption—and are twice as likely as girls to have additional support for learning needs arising from autism.
I know that you are not clinically qualified, Auditor General, but can you speculate, or do you have any evidence, on what might have caused those manifestations?