Nick Herbert: Labour's Dangerous dogs proposal will penalise millions of dog owners

I don't like Labour's idea to force everyone to insure their dogs against attacking people. For one thing it punishes the many for the stupidity of the few - typical Labour really. And for another, how are those on low incomes and pensioners going to afford this insurance? Are Labour actually saying that only "well off" people are allowed to have dogs? For some OAP's a dog is the only company they have.

Commenting on the publication of DEFRA’s consultation on dangerous dogs, Shadow Environment Secretary Nick Herbert, said:

"The problem of dangerous dogs is growing and the current legislation is clearly not working, but the Government's proposals risk penalising millions of law-abiding dog owners with the blunt instrument of a dog tax. We should be targeting the minority of irresponsible dog owners, not the vast majority who are responsible dog lovers. And we need to legislate carefully, not in haste, so that we don’t repeat the mistakes of the infamously flawed Dangerous Dogs Act.

Conservatives and many others have been calling for action to deal with dangerous dogs for years, and we are pleased that the Government has finally woken up to the problem. But we question why they have taken so long and are announcing these plans just weeks before the election is called"

The truth about all this is that Labour have had thirteen years to find a solution to this growing problem, and only now (weeks before a General Election) are they doing something about it. Electioneering?