 The next item of business is topical questions. At question number one, I call Jamie Greene. To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to introducing a ban on American XL bully dogs in light of a series of reported attacks involving such dogs. First, can I just say that we all share the horror at recent reported attacks and deaths due to XL bully dogs and my thoughts are with all of those impacted. We have noted the intention of the UK Government to take steps to introduce a ban on American XL bully dogs. The Scottish Government officials met with DEFRA and officials from Wales and Northern Ireland last Friday to discuss and hear more about the UK Government's proposed approach. The UK Government are planning to convene an expert group to specify a legal definition of the American bully XL, which will consist of a body of concern with animal welfare, veterinary science and practice, and with breeds of dogs and include representatives from the police and the four nations. That work, when carried out, will inform our consideration on any ban moving forward. I thank the minister for that update. All her thoughts are with the families of those affected by recent fatalities and attacks. In light of the spate of attacks, I think that urgent action must be taken, and I welcome the UK Government's swift response to this end. However, of course, there are very many skills of thought out there about how we deal with so-called dangerous dogs ranging from outright bans, such as the case in this scenario, to better enforcement of existing breeding and ownership laws. Can I ask the minister, in addition to the consultation and liaison with the UK Government stakeholders, what expert stakeholder advice and public consultation the Scottish Government will be undertaking before reaching its own conclusions? Given the urgency around public safety, when might we expect a firm decision on this matter? I agree with the member. I think that what matters here is careful evidence-based decision, which is focused on protecting the public safety in Scotland. We are committed to giving full consideration to the issue and to ensure that we arrive at the correct decision. It is clear from the UK Government's announcement that there is a wide range of views in this area from experts and members of the public, and it is imperative that the Scottish Government moves forward will consider all voices. I do not have a time scale at this moment for the consultation, but I will keep you updated. Jamie Greene Thank you for that, and I am sure that the Parliament would appreciate that. As with the general public, there are many responsible dog owners out there who may also have reservations about any forthcoming legislation and what that means for their own pet ownership. Back in January of this year, you may recall that I raised with the former First Minister the very serious issue of serious organised criminal gangs who were using extreme breeding techniques to create fashionable hybrid breeds, such as the American XL Bulley. Often, those dogs are maltreated, they are poorly bred, they have severe health problems, and they are treated as valuable commodities, often to be sold to irresponsible owners. I know that it is a very difficult debate. Are there bad dogs out there, or simply bad owners and bad breeders? Can I reiterate the questions that I asked the First Minister earlier this year? What progress has the Scottish Government made since then on the potential toughening of, or even simple enforcement of, the very many existing laws that govern extreme breeding, illegal breeding and irresponsible dog ownership in Scotland? Minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We have established an operational working group involving local authorities Police Scotland and COSLA and other key stakeholders to progress this very important work, and we published updated statutory guidance to help local authorities carry out their functions under the control of dogs legislation. If I may, Presiding Officer, I think it's really important here to get the message across because I know there's a lot of concern out there in the general public for people that may have these breeds of dogs. It's very, very important that we emphasise that a dog being a banned breed does not automatically mean that it's going to be put down. There are conditions that can be met such as having the dog neutered, spayed, or keeping the dog muzzled in public, and the dog can be placed on the index of exempted dogs by the court. That is an index that is operated by DEFRA on a UK-wide basis. Thank you, and Stephen Kerr. I thank you, Presiding Officer, just to reiterate the point that Jamie Greene has made. Can I ask the minister what is the minister's conclusions about the argument between bad dogs and actually bad owners whose mistreatment of dogs leads the dogs to behave in a certain way? So where's the emphasis going to be? The vast majority of dog owners are responsible people who take good care of their animals. However, there are a small minority of owners who have failed to keep their dog under proper control and do not have the same responsibility as the general public does, so the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports of a planned strike by school support staff, including janitors, cleaners, caterers and school support assistance, over pay and conditions. Local government pay negotiations are a matter for local authorities as employers and unions. The Scottish Government and COSLA have committed to respecting the negotiating arrangement as part of the Verity House agreement, but our strikes in our schools are in no-one's interests, including pupils, parents and carers who have already had to deal with significant disruption over the past three years. We continue our engagement with COSLA on how staff and services are supported this year and next and urge all parties to engage meaningfully in negotiations to avert any strikes. I thank the Minister for the response. However, with more than three quarters of Scotland's schools facing closure later this month, it is clear that support staff in our schools are rapidly losing confidence in this Scottish Government. The support staff that work tirelessly to keep our schools running have been neglected by this Government for too long. It is time for the Government to take swift action and meet with union representatives to deliver a fair deal for our staff. Will the minister commit to meeting with unison to deliver a fair deal for our staff? It is really important that we respect and that this Government is committed to continuing to work in partnership with our local government colleagues but also to respect their role as employers. As I said in my first answer, the Government is engaging with the local government and we will continue to do so. I think that our employees and staff across schools in Scotland striking would not be their first choice. They know how important the work they do is to the children, parents and carers. They have not come to the decision to get that mandate easily. One of the first things that we all need to do is to respect the fact that they have that mandate and to make sure that we all get around the table and have those discussions in a meaningful way. However, we need to respect the role as local government as the employer in this situation and also to respect our local government colleagues' mandates. I am very grateful for that particular answer from the minister, because Ros Foyer, the general secretary of STUC, said that if we want to stop workers feeling compelled to take strike action in the face of a cost of living crisis, then the Government must present a fair offer. Unions have been waiting for five months now and inflation remains high. Workers need a decent pay rise. Our parents, pupils, janitors, cleaners, caterers, school support assistants all deserve that. Can the minister confirm that the Verity House agreement is not a shield to protect the reputation of this Scottish Government but should be a vehicle for adequate sensible funding to support the hard-working staff across the education sector? Verity House is a really important opportunity for us, not just the Government, but this whole Parliament to reset our relationship with local government. For too long, we have treated local government as if it was the deployment arm of this Parliament, whether it has been in the Government or members' bills. We need to respect the democratic mandate of our local government colleagues. This Government has taken action to support our local government colleagues in the settlement, so £155 million was added to the settlement in order to allow for the initial meaningful pay rise. We then, just last month, gave reassurance to councils around an additional £94 million increase on the offer that they had made to allow them to make a further offer. We continue to have discussions with COSLA to see how resources can be found in order to settle the dispute without the need for strike action. However, we all need to be conscious of the very challenging financial position that is faced not just by the Scottish Government but also by local authorities. The right to strike is one that is both actively upheld and supported in Scotland, but our neighbours clearly do not always share the same values as witnessed by the UK Government's abhorrent anti-strike legislation. Will the minister commit to always upholding the right to strike in Scotland? The Scottish Government strongly opposes any bill that undermines legitimate trade union activity and does not respect fair work principles. It is a long-standing position that a progressive approach to industrial relationships, along with a greater, not fewer protection for workers, is at the heart of a fairer, more successful society. The UK Government's introduction of the minimum service level act is a direct contradiction to the Scottish Government's position. The Scottish Government opposes the introduction of the 2016 trade union act alongside trade union and local authority partners, and we continue to call for it to be repealed. Last year, £46 million was cut from colleges and universities budgets to fund pay deals in schools. Pitting different parts of the education system against each other represents an egregious failure of government. Will the minister confirm that, if he grants any additionality here, it will not come from the education budget and will not lead to cuts in other portfolios? I think that the Conservative members and the member in particular fail to understand basic economics. It is not possible to continue coming here asking for additional resources for X or Y without suggesting where those additional resources should come from. The Scottish budget is fully committed. If we are going to make changes, if we are going to support our services further, then we will have to look up what adjustments we have to make across the budget. I think that it is just lucky that we did not listen to the Conservatives around about a year ago when Liz Truss brought forward her disastrous budget, which has left implications for local authority and public authorities, not just in Scotland but across the UK, having to face unprecedented levels of inflation in a year. It is quite remarkable that our focus of attention is not on our children and young people, but on what our country has been through, what those young people have been through and now more strikes. Setting aside the issue that the SNP has been defunding local government for the last decade, what contingency plans are already in place to support children and young people in their learning? Is there a plan already in place for virtual learning, for remote learning? Please tell us what is the contingency to support children and young people—not striking, but children and young people. The member makes a really good point in bringing us back to why it is that we in the Government and our calls for partners and our trade union colleagues are so keen to settle the dispute with outside strike action because of the damage that that action would have on those children. Cabinet Secretary, as you would imagine, in discussions with our local government colleagues on what mitigations we need to be put in place and how we can have a consistent approach in achieving that. I want to go back to one of the points that the member made. In spite of the swinging cuts from the UK Government to this Parliament, in real terms local government had an increase of £793 million this year. That is a real-terms increase of 3 per cent, and the Accounts Commission confirmed that, since 2013-14, local government funding is in real terms 2.6 per cent higher.