Correspondence

Letter from Lord Hanson and Baroness Levitt to Lord Davies detailing government amendments for Lords committee stage: 3 November 2025 (accessible)

Updated 4 November 2025

Lord Hanson of Flint
Minister of State for the Home Office
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

The Lord Davies of Gower
House of Lords

Monday 3rd November 2025

Dear Lord Davies,

Crime and Policing Bill : Government amendments for Lords Committee stage

We are writing to give you details of a second tranche of government amendments which today we have tabled for Lords Committee stage.

The amendments include the following new measures:

Disregards and pardons scheme for anyone convicted or cautioned as a child for the offence of loitering or soliciting (new clauses “Disregarding convictions and cautions for loitering or soliciting when under 18” and “Pardons for convictions and cautions for loitering or soliciting when under 18”)

These new clauses provide for a disregard and pardon scheme for individuals who received convictions or cautions for the offence of persistently soliciting or loitering in public for the purposes of prostitution (under section 1 of the Street Offences Act 1959), where the offence occurred while they were under the age of 18. Whilst the section 1 offence remains on the statute book for persons aged 18 or over, the offence was amended in 2015 so that it no longer applied to those under 18. Providing for convictions and cautions for the section 1 offence, where the offender was under 18 at the time of the offence, to be automatically disregarded addresses concerns that such convictions or cautions restrict individuals, including those that have received the conviction or caution as a result of exploitation, from exiting prostitution and entering formal employment. Where such a conviction or caution is disregarded, it would no longer appear on a criminal records certificate. These new clauses further provide for automatic pardons for persons convicted of, or cautioned for, soliciting or loitering for the purpose of prostitution where the offence occurred while they were under 18 years old.

These provisions apply to England and Wales only.

The government undertook to bring forward these new clauses in the Lords in response to new clause 19 tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi at Commons Report stage.

Public processions and assemblies: cumulative disruption (new clause “Public processions and assemblies: duty to take account of cumulative disruption”)

On 5 October, the Home Secretary announced that the Government would amend sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 explicitly to require a senior police officer to take account of the cumulative impact of frequent protests on local areas when considering whether to impose conditions on public processions and assemblies. This new clause reenacts provisions, with modifications, that were previously in the Public Order Act 1986 (Serious Disruption to the Life of the Community) Regulations 2023 (S.I. 2023/655) which have been ruled ultra vires (for reasons unrelated to the provisions relating to cumulative disruption).

This provision applies to England and Wales only.

Protests outside the homes of public office holders (new clause “Harassment of and representations to a person in their home”)

In recent years there have been several protests outside the private residences of MPs and other elected representatives. Such protests can be particularly intimidating, including for family members. At present, the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (“the 2001 Act”) provides certain protections. Section 42 allows police to direct individuals away from a private property if the protest is aimed at persuading the occupant to take, or refrain from taking, a future action (for example, a vote in Parliament). Section 42A makes it an offence to persuade or make representations to someone in their home that they should do something that they are not under any obligation to do, or that they should not do something that they are entitled or required to do, where that that person’s presence amounts or is likely to amount to harassment (or similar).

However, these provisions are limited in scope and have proved challenging for the police to apply consistently. This has real world consequences, where in some cases MPs and other elected representatives have been left with loud and intimidatory protests outside their homes. The measures do not apply to protests which focus on past actions – for example, if individuals were to protest outside an MP’s house today to complain about how the MP had already voted, this dispersal power and offence would not be apply.

This new clause amends section 42 and 42A of the 2001 Act to remove the requirement that protest activity must be linked to a specific future action. This change will ensure that harassing or intimidatory protests outside homes of individuals are captured, regardless of whether they relate to past or future conduct.

In addition, the new clause restricts protests outside the private residences of public office holders involved in democratic processes (such as MPs, electoral candidates and peers). The new clause does not carry a harassment requirement, as the Government considers any protest outside of the home of a public office holder should, by default, be regarded as harassment. The measure will apply to any premises used as a private residence by a public office holder, which may include a residential constituency or London address. This would not apply to official residences, preserving the right to protest in public political spaces (for example, near No. 10) nor will it apply to constituency offices. The offence involves being present outside a public office-holder’s home for a specific purpose. That purpose must be to make representations to, or to persuade, the resident to either do or not do something in connection with their role as a public office holder; or take action they are or were not obliged to take, or to refrain from doing something they are or were entitled or required to do. This offence carries a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment, a level 4 fine (£2,500), or both.

This provision applies to England and Wales only.

Criminalising the possession and publication of pornography portraying strangulation or suffocation (new clauses “Pornographic images of strangulation or suffocation: England and Wales and Northern Ireland” and “Pornographic images of strangulation or suffocation: Scotland” and amendments to clauses 197, 200 and 201)

There is clear and compelling evidence as to the role of pornography in shaping sexual activity and expectations. Strangulation pornography normalises practices of strangulation in sex, particularly men strangling women. There are numerous studies which consider the rise of strangulation during sex and conclude that it is becoming commonplace, particularly among young people who may be unaware of the long-term harms such practices may have.

It is already a criminal offence to possess pornographic material which depicts life-threatening activity in an explicit and realistic way pursuant to the “possession of extreme pornography” offence (section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008). We consider that, pursuant to the provisions of the Obscene Publications Act 1959, it is also likely to be a criminal offence to publish and distribute such material. Such material includes explicit and realistic images of strangulation or suffocation where they appear to be life-threatening.

However, it may be difficult from looking at an image to assess whether the strangulation or suffocation appears to be life-threatening. In her Independent Pornography Review, published on 27 February, Baroness Bertin recommended that “non-fatal strangulation pornography (commonly known as ‘choking’ in pornography) should be illegal to possess, distribute, and publish”. This measure gives effect to that recommendation by criminalising the possession and publication of any pornography that depicts strangulation or suffocation without the need to prove whether it appears to be life-threatening. The Government intends the measure to be listed as a priority offence under the Online Safety Act 2023, which gives online platforms duties to take steps to reduce illegal content on their services.

These amendments, taken together, apply UK-wide.

The government undertook to bring forward this measure in the Lords in response to new clause 102 tabled by Jess Asato at Commons Report stage.

The attached annex details further amendments to the existing provisions in the Bill. As Baroness Levitt said when opening the debate at Second Reading, many of these amendments extend the application of certain provisions to Scotland and/or Northern Ireland at the request of the Scottish Government or Department of Justice in Northern Ireland, as the case may be.

We attach supplementary delegated powers and ECHR memorandums.

We are copying this letter to Lord Keen of Elie, Baroness Doocey, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Lord Alton of Liverpool (Chair, Joint Committee on Human Rights), Baroness Ramsey of Wall Heath (Chair, Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee), Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge, Baroness Bertin, Baroness Goudie, Lord Walney, Lord Hogan-Howe, Chris Philp, Matt Vickers, Max Wilkinson, Luke Taylor, Sarah Owen (Chair, Women and Equalities Committee), Tonia Antoniazzi, Jess Asato and Dame Caroline Dinenage. We are also placing a copy of the letter and enclosures in the library of the House.

Yours sincerely

[Signed]

Lord Hanson of Flint

[Signed]

Baroness Levitt KC

Annex

Data protection overrides (amendments to clauses 7, 94, 138, 166 and 192 and Schedule 3)

The Bill includes a number of data-sharing provisions. For example, clause 7 confers a power on the Secretary of State, by regulations, to require relevant authorities to provide information about anti-social behaviour incidents and their response. Such provisions include a bar on the disclosure of information if that disclosure would contravene data protection legislation (see, for example, new section 105A(6) of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 as inserted by clause 7). These protections against data protection overrides are now no longer needed as general provision to the same effect is now made by section 183A of the Data Protection Act 2018, which was inserted by section 106(2) of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 which came into force on 20 August. New section 183A(1) of the 2018 Act creates a presumption, in relation to any relevant enactments, or any rules of law, conferring powers or imposing duties relating to the processing of personal data, that requirements under the “main data protection legislation” are not overridden by such powers or duties. Now that this general provision is in force, these amendments remove the redundant duplicative provisions from the Bill.

Child criminal exploitation: offence (amendments to clauses 40, 41, 197 and 200)

Clause 40 creates a new offence of child criminal exploitation and clause 41 sets out further rules about what needs to be proved to establish guilt of the offence. The amendment inserting new subsection (7) into clause 41 clarifies, for the avoidance of doubt, that an adult may commit an offence under clause 40 in respect of a child who is under the age of criminal responsibility (the age of criminal responsibility varies across the different jurisdictions). The amendment to clause 41(5) is a drafting amendment. Following extension of the CCE offence to Scotland and Northern Ireland in the Commons, further amendments to clauses 40 and 41 define (in cases that extend across jurisdictions, both within the UK and abroad) in which jurisdiction the conduct that the adult intends to cause the child to engage in must be a criminal offence. An amendment to clause 197 enables the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland and Scottish Ministers to make provision, within devolved or transferred competence, which is consequential on the CCE offence (clause 40 or 41). An amendment to clause 200 clarifies the territorial application of clause 40.

Child criminal exploitation prevention orders (amendments to clause 42, 48, 51, 54, 61, 197, 198, 199, 200 and 201 and Schedule 5, and new clause “Child criminal exploitation prevention orders: Scotland and Northern Ireland” and new Schedules “CCE prevention orders: Scotland” and “CCE prevention orders: Northern Ireland”)

The amendment to clause 42(3) states on the face of the Bill that when a court, on an application for a child criminal exploitation prevention order (CCEPO), (or where a CCEPO is imposed at the end of criminal proceedings (other than on conviction)), determines that the first condition for making an order has been met (namely, that the court is satisfied that the defendant has engaged in child criminal exploitation or in conduct associated with child criminal exploitation), the standard of proof is the civil standard (that is to say, the balance of probabilities). An amendment to Schedule 5 similarly makes explicit that the civil standard of proof applies where a court is considering making a CCEPO on conviction. At the request of the Scottish Government and Department of Justice in Northern Ireland, new clause “Child criminal exploitation prevention orders: Scotland and Northern Ireland” and new Schedules “CCE prevention orders: Scotland” and “CCE prevention orders: Northern Ireland” make provision for CCEPOs in Scotland and Northern Ireland, both upon application and by a court at the end of criminal proceedings. The other amendments make consequential amendments to the CCEPO regime in England and Wales and enable the Department of Justice to issue guidance to the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland in respect of the exercise of their functions in connection with CCEPOs. The amendments also make provision for cross-border enforcement of CCEPOs, by making breach of a CCEPO issued in any of the jurisdictions a criminal offence in the other jurisdictions (for example, breach of a CCEPO issued in England and Wales is an offence in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and vice-versa).

“Cuckooing” (amendments to clause 57 and Schedule 6)

Clause 56 creates an offence of “cuckooing”, which is where criminals take over the home of another person, without their consent, in order to perpetrate illegal activity. The clarificatory amendment to the interpretative clause 57 makes it clear that control over another’s dwelling may, for the purposes of the offence in clause 56 be via another person The amendments to Schedule 6 add the offence of coercive internal concealment, created by clause 59 of the Bill, to the list of offences in England and Wales, and the offence of child criminal exploitation, created by clause 40, to the list of offences in Scotland and Northern Ireland that are relevant offences for the purpose of the cuckooing offence.

Child sexual abuse material (new clauses “Child sexual abuse image generators: Northern Ireland”, “Child sexual abuse image generators: Scotland” and “Possession of advice or guidance about child sexual abuse or CSA images: Scotland” and amendments to clauses 63, 89, 197, 200 and 201 and Schedule 7)

Clause 63 creates a new offence which criminalises the making, possession, adaptation or supply of digital files or models designed to create child sexual abuse material (the offence applies to England and Wales). Clause 64 extends the so-called “paedophile manual” offence in section 69 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 to cover AI generated images (the offence applies to England and Wales and Northern Ireland). At the request of the Scottish Government, new clause “Child sexual abuse image generators: Scotland” makes equivalent provision for Scotland to that made by clause 63 for England and Wales and new clause “Possession of advice or guidance about child sexual abuse or CSA images: Scotland” makes equivalent provision for Scotland to that made in section 69 of the Serious Crime Act 2015, as amended by clause 64. At the request of the Department of Justice, new clause “Child sexual abuse image generators: Northern Ireland” makes provision for Northern Ireland equivalent to that made by clause 63 for England and Wales.

Offences relating to intimate image abuse (amendments to Schedule 9)

Schedule 9 to the Bill creates new offences to criminalise the taking or recording of an intimate photograph or film without consent or reasonable belief in consent and installing equipment with intent to enable the taking or recording of intimate photographs or films without consent or reasonable belief in consent. These amendments make two changes to these provisions. First, new paragraph 6A of Schedule 9 extends the time limit for prosecuting the summary only offences in existing section 66B(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (sharing or threatening to share an intimate photograph or film), and new sections 66AA(1) and 66AC(1) added by the Bill (the taking and installing offences). This amendment gives effect to a recommendation made by the Commons Women and Equalities Committee in their report on tackling non-consensual intimate image abuse (fourth report of session 2024/25). The second amendment will ensure that the courts also have the power, on conviction, to deprive offenders of any images in respect of which they were convicted of the ‘breastfeeding voyeurism recording’ offence (section 67A(2B) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003), and anything containing such images. The amendment will ensure a consistent approach to deprivation orders across the suite of intimate image offences.

Restriction on granting replacement driving licences in a new name (amendments to clauses 94, 200, 201 and Schedule 10)

Chapter 4 of Part 5 of the Bill strengthens the framework governing the management of registered sex offenders. Amongst other things, these provisions place restrictions to prevent registered sex offenders from changing their name where there is a risk of sexual harm. The Bill includes provision conferring a power on the Secretary of State to make regulations that prevent a registered sex offender being granted a replacement GB driving licence in a new name where certain conditions are met. The provisions in Chapter 4 of Part 5 already generally apply to Northern Ireland; these amendments now make provision for conferring an equivalent power on the Department of Infrastructure in respect of driving licences issued by the Driver and Vehicle Agency in Northern Ireland. The provisions have also been extended so that the restrictions that may be placed on the granting of a replacement driving licence in a new name in Great Britain apply where the application is to replace a Northern Ireland driving licence, and vice versa.

Child abduction (new clause “Child abduction: Northern Ireland” and amendments to clauses 197, 200 and 201)

Clause 104 criminalises the detention of a child (by a parent or person with similar responsibility) outside the UK without the appropriate consent. At the request of the Department of Justice, this new clause creates a similar offence in Northern Ireland.

Regulated activity (new clause “Safeguarding vulnerable groups: regulated activity (Northern Ireland)” and amendments to clauses 200 and 201)

Clause 105 brings those working with children in a supervised capacity into regulated activity, enabling employers to access enhanced criminal records checks, which include a check of the children’s barred list. The clause gives effect to a recommendation made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. At the request of the Department of Health in Northern Ireland, this new clause makes analogous provision for Northern Ireland.

Extraction of online information (amendments to clauses 137 and 169 and Schedule 14 and new clause “Prevention and investigation measures: online information”)

Clauses 130 to 137 of the Bill confer powers on law enforcement agencies to extract information from online accounts as part of their investigations including into immigration crime, sexual abuse cases, and to protect UK national security and our borders. Amongst other things, these provisions amend provisions in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 relating to the extraction of information from electronic devices with the agreement of the device user. The amendment to Schedule 14 makes a further consequential amendment to the 2022 Act.

It is increasingly common practice for individuals to store their data in the cloud for various reasons, for example to free up space on their device or simply because of the way devices or applications are intended to function, but also, in some cases, deliberately to make it less accessible to law enforcement. This is particularly the case with young people, where operational experience has shown that this cohort will regularly store data online. This data can be critical in supporting law enforcement to manage, in particular, terrorism risk. These amendments will ensure that the police can access information stored in online accounts where the individual is subject to a Youth Diversion Order, Terrorism Prevention and Investigations Measures (TPIM) or State Threats Prevention and Investigation Measures (STPIM).The increasing reliance on cloud data means the police are likely to have an increased need to access cloud data as part of compliance checks, where an individual is subject to online restrictions as part of these orders. The amendments to clauses 137 and 169 and new clause “Prevention and investigation measures: online information” will provide a clear statutory basis for officers to access cloud data when conducting a compliance check for a YDO respondent or TPIM/STPIM subject.

Youth Diversion Orders (amendments to clauses 167 and 182)

Chapter 1 of Part 14 creates Youth Diversion Orders (YDOs). Clause 167(2) provides that a court may make a YDO where, amongst other things, it is satisfied that the respondent has committed a terrorism offence. A drafting amendment to clause 167(3) clarifies the meaning of a terrorism offence for these purposes. Clause 182(2) of the Bill provides that the time limit for complaints in a magistrates’ court in England and Wales (that the magistrates’ court shall not hear a complaint unless the information was laid, or the complaint made, within six months of the time the offence was committed or the matter of complaint arose) does not apply to YDO applications. The amendment to clause 182 disapplies the time limit for applications to a magistrates’ court in Northern Ireland (as well as in England and Wales).

Commencement (amendment to clause 201)

This amendment removes clause 195 (extradition) from the list of provisions that come into force on Royal Assent; the clause will instead be commenced by regulations made by the Secretary of State under clause 201(1).