Education certainly.
Government taking seriously the current issues of anyone being able to call themselves a trainer and our woeful failure to uphold our animal welfare legislation when it comes to dog training - it would seem that abuse is just fine if you call yourself a dog trainer.
I submitted multiple videos of a dog trainer repeatedly picking a dog up by its ears and slamming it into the ground (because the dog broke its sit), him talking to camera telling the viewer he was tricking the dog into breaking the sit SO he could punish it... lifting the dog by the neck on a slip lead whilst at the same time slapping it sharply across the nose... repeatedly yanking the dog off its feet whilst it was running full pelt the other way on a long line (again connected to a free running noose round its neck) causing the dog to scream in pain.
The police said not their problem.
The RSPCA eventually visited - he told them he didn't know it was dangerous or abuse and wouldn't do it again. And then carried on exactly as he had been for years.
In theory our animal welfare laws would allow for prosecution for people like that - in reality, it just doesn't happen, because it is left to a charity to do it.
Social Media is now full of trainers who are great at producing snappy video content - who use aversives that store up problems, cause dogs pain etc... and they're super appealing to new owners or anyone without any dog behaviour knowledge. It is nigh on impossible to explain to people what the risks are and that there are alternatives, you just get a barrage of 'well you're just jealous' and 'where are your videos' (my videos would make watching paint dry look fun, because positive training and effective behaviour modification is NOT dramatic to watch!).
Stronger penalties for dog related incidents - if you injure or kill your child by not strapping them into your car, by drunk driving, by leaving them home alone when they're too young, you're likely to go to prison.
Choose to leave your child in the care of an addict, in the home of a dog who has already injured a child, who was bought knowingly as an illegal breed, and you know is dangerous (no question of that, they asked for the dog to be shut outside!).... and despite all those red flags and concious choices to leave the child there, when the child was killed, neither parent answered legally to that negligence, nor did Grandma, in fact the only person who did time was the dogs owner who was NOT present at the time of the incident and he did time for owning an illegal breed (a matter of weeks) not for the death of the child.
If I trusted any government to run a scheme properly AND to enforce the policing of that scheme properly and not allow local authorities to do piss all...
Then possibly a scheme where to own a dog over a certain weight, you'd have to have proof of passing a dog training/behaviour/responsible owner course and prove you've the financial capacity to pay for damages via insurance or a savings account.
The flaws with that scheme are local authorities would not enforce properly, and the government would probably pick the Kennel Club to invent the testing requirements and they're stuck in the dark ages, couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery and this would require the regulation of the dog training industry which they seem reluctant to do.
It is too much work, in short. Particularly to police those who simply won't abide by the rules - and unlike a car that can be seized and destroyed if its uninsured/driver has no licence/etc, these are real live animals who will suffer.
Banning dogs appears much easier and is a sop to the public who want 'someone to do something' - the fact it doesn't WORK is irrelevant... it looks good, it looks hard line and pro-active. So its likely what will happen in the end.