Dangerous dog law U-turn shows Labour's lack of bite, say Tories

Ministers were accused of making a "dog's dinner" of proposals for cracking down on dangerous canines after a U-turn on plans for compulsory insurance for the animals, which have now been dropped barely a week after they were published.

Proposals for more than 5 million dog owners to be forced to buy third-party insurance against the risk of their pet attacking someone were launched last week, as part of a package of measures by environment secretary, Hilary Benn, and the home secretary, Alan Johnson.

They were included in proposed changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act aimed at tackling the growing problem of some breeds being used as weapons on inner-city estates. But they provoked an angry response from critics who said the measures would hit law-abiding owners whose dogs did not cause any harm.

In a statement released today, Benn said he could now "rule out" compulsory insurance for all dogs. He said he didn't want to penalise "responsible dog owners". Instead, he said only dogs causing trouble could face being targeted with an insurance requirement as part of a control order, or "dogbo".

The plan for all dogs to be compulsorily microchipped, a central part of the measures announced last week, have not been altered and are still expected to go ahead. The idea is that the chips will allow authorities to trace owners more easily.

The Tories accused ministers of turning a flagship announcement into a "political dog's dinner". The shadow environment secretary, Nick Herbert, said: "Labour have dithered for years on this issue and then rushed out a policy consultation weeks before an election that was immediately seen as totally flawed.

"A dog tax on more than 5 million owners was proposed last week, and is now ruled out by Hilary Benn in a humiliating U-turn that just proves how tired and incompetent this government has become.

"We need a comprehensive approach to this problem with a focus on the minority of owners who use dangerous dogs as weapons, not the vast majority of responsible dog-lovers."