Last week, after a spate of dog attacks, some of which proved fatal, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, announced that the XL bully would be banned. Despite the fact that this new fangled American breed is responsible for half the deaths caused by dog attacks in the UK since 2021, this ban has provoked outrage.

There are two groups of outraged people. Firstly, there are those who falsely believe that all extant XL bullies will be forcibly put down. Under the Government’s proposal, they will, in fact, be sterilised, muzzled when in public, and allowed to die off naturally.

The second group relies on a rather fatuous argument. They argue that the humans who own the aggressive dogs are dangerous, not the dogs themselves. Yet a good many people who advance this idea, repudiate the analogous point of view made by the American gun lobby, that owners, not guns, are dangerous.

But if the ban is to work, it has to be better planned than the last ban. In the early 1990s, American pit-bulls were banned in the UK. However, the population has not diminished. This is because the ban wasn’t thought through carefully enough. Although importing American pit-bulls is illegal, the importing of their sperm is not. So, bitches are artificially inseminated, and the ban is neatly dodged.

But is an outright ban on any breed of dog necessarily the answer? Might another approach be better?

The answer, in my view, is yes. The Government should bring back the dog license. But it should only be awarded according to certain criteria.

Firstly, the applicant’s home should be assessed. A twelfth-floor bedsit would not be a suitable place to house a large, energetic dog such as a Rottweiler. Nor would it be suitable for someone who wished to have a number of dogs.

Secondly, applicants must undergo some sort of training. They should be taught how to look after, exercise, and socialise a dog. They should be taught not to let their dogs off the lead near livestock, to respect the fact that not everyone wants random dogs to leap all over them, and that canine exceptionalism is entirely a figment of their own imaginations,. Although their four-legged darlings are undoubtedly special to them, they are not special in the grand scheme of things.

If a dog owner contravenes the terms and conditions of the license, or has no license, the penalties should be severe – a hefty fine, suspension or revocation of the licence, etc. But of course, as developing, then implementing a system will cost money, and possibly votes, the political will just won’t be there.

These suggestions may seem harsh. But if everyone knew where they stood, everyone, dogs and humans alike, would probably be much happier.