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 693 contributions
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Lastly, Rami Okasha, what would be the impact for the cohort of people who you look after?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Where does the RCN sit on the issue?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Dr Provan and Mr Poolman have alluded to the potential impact on the day-to-day running of our health service, which is under a bit of pressure, as we know. How the proposed bill would impact the running of general medical practice is an added complexity. Dr Provan has suggested that the impact would be detrimental to any GP surgery. Dr Kennedy, will you expand on that?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Where does the Royal Pharmaceutical Society fit into the jigsaw?
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Meeting date: 13 November 2024
Brian Whittle
You are right that this is an on-going petition; it has been considered over some time. The same issues keep arising, and I currently have six individual casework items open on six different wind farms in the south of Scotland. I will not take too long on this, but the basic thread running through all of them is the inability of communities to be properly heard or to be involved in consultation. I have a whole list.
We considered all of the cases and the public’s response to the building of wind farms or solar farms. In one case, there were 57 against and two for; in the next one, there were 57 against and one for. There was a huge amount of consideration of the impact of the developments on the local environment. There was a huge amount of worry about that, and about the impact of the developments on the value of people’s houses.
When I meet wind farm developers, I always stress that the most important thing that they should do is to consult the local community at the earliest possible point. They all say, “Absolutely, that’s what we’re going to do,” but the overwhelming feeling from reports that I hear and constituency work that I have done is that they avoid doing that. The public believes that, even when there is a local vote against a wind farm, all the developers have to do is refer that to the Scottish Government and it will be passed. The overwhelming feeling is that public views are not heard at all.
I commend the petitioner. As I said, I represent an area with a high density of wind farms and plans for more in future, and there does not seem to be any change in how consultations take place or in the interaction between wind farm developers and local communities. I will end my comments there.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 12 November 2024
Brian Whittle
To follow up my question, I want to ask about advance directives. I do not know whether that falls within your capability. Say that there is a situation—it might be a comorbidity or a dementia-type scenario—in which someone lacks capacity. When they had capacity, they made an advance directive setting out what they wanted to do at a certain time, but enacting that would require the intervention of another party. Should such a scenario be considered?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 12 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Good morning. I appreciate the witnesses giving up their time to be here. I want to chat about the definition of “capacity” in the bill. Under the bill, it must be established that patients
“are not suffering from any mental disorder which might affect the making of the request”.
It strikes me that any terminal diagnosis will have some sort of mental health impact. In those circumstances, does the definition of “capacity” in the bill have the effect of excluding anyone with a mental disorder? How do we square that circle in relation to the definition of “mental disorder”?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 12 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Dr Neal has just said that doctors make decisions about capacity on a daily basis. In talking about the definition of capacity, and given what we are discussing, is that element of subjectiveness a problem?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 12 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Good morning. I think that the bill as drafted means that if you are going to access assisted dying, it has to be self-administered. That brings up the question of continued capacity throughout the whole process. Let us say that you decide that this is your direction of travel. You have a degenerative illness that you know will bring you to a position where self-administering will become more and more difficult. Is there a danger that that rushes people into making a decision and into accessing assisted dying before they potentially would like to?
11:30Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 12 November 2024
Brian Whittle
Do I have time to ask another question, convener?