👮‍♂️ Crime and Policing Bill (Eighth sitting)

• Clause 42: Sexual Activity in Presence of Child
  • An amendment was proposed to exclude the offence of engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child from the defence in the Modern Slavery Act 2015.
  • The clause aims to strengthen laws against sexual offences by amending the Sexual Offences Act 2003, focusing on protecting children and vulnerable adults.
  • It addresses a loophole where offenders could escape prosecution if they believed the child was unaware of the sexual activity, even if they gained sexual gratification from the child’s presence.
  • The amendment ensures that such behaviour is prosecutable, even if the child is asleep or pretending to be asleep.
• Clause 43: Child Sex Offences: Grooming Aggravating Factor
  • This clause introduces grooming as a statutory aggravating factor in sentencing for specified child sexual offences.
  • It aims to ensure that courts consider grooming as a factor that increases the severity of the crime, leading to potentially harsher sentences.
  • An amendment was proposed to introduce a specific aggravating factor for group-based sexual grooming, but it was not passed.
  • Discussions also touched on the need for a national inquiry into grooming gangs, but the government argued that existing inquiries and reports already cover these issues.
• Clause 44: Power to Scan for Child Sexual Abuse Images at the Border
  • This clause grants Border Force officers the power to require individuals suspected of child abuse offences to unlock their electronic devices for scanning.
  • The scan will specifically look for digital fingerprints of known child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
  • An amendment was proposed to automatically deport foreign nationals found with child sexual abuse images, but the government highlighted existing deportation powers and plans to review the deportation regime.
• Clauses 45-47: Duty to Report Suspected Child Sex Offences
  • These clauses introduce a mandatory duty for professionals and volunteers working with children to report suspected child sexual abuse to the police or local authorities.
  • An amendment to remove the exemption for reporting if another person has already reported was not passed.
  • The government plans to provide guidance and training to ensure effective implementation of the duty.
  • Discussions included concerns about the impact on professional confidentiality and the need for clear guidelines on who to report to within local authorities.
• Clauses 48-51: Exceptions to Mandatory Reporting
  • These clauses provide exceptions to the mandatory reporting duty for consensual sexual activities between older teenagers and for certain disclosures by children about their own harmful sexual behaviour.
  • The aim is to avoid over-reporting of consensual relationships and to allow children to seek help without immediate criminalisation.
  • The government emphasized the need for professional judgment and the provision of guidance to handle such situations appropriately.
• Clause 52: Preventing or Deterring Reporting
  • This clause makes it a criminal offence to prevent or deter someone from reporting suspected child sexual abuse, with a potential penalty of up to seven years’ imprisonment.
  • It targets those who might try to cover up abuse within organizations or by abusers themselves, aiming to create a strong deterrent against such actions.
• Clauses 53-54: Modifications and Future-Proofing
  • Clause 53 modifies the mandatory reporting duty for police officers, allowing them to handle reports through their existing channels.
  • Clause 54 provides the Secretary of State with the power to amend the reporting regime as needed, ensuring flexibility and parliamentary oversight.
• Clause 55: Guidance on Disclosure of Information
  • This clause allows the Secretary of State to issue statutory guidance to the police on disclosing information to prevent sexual offending.
  • It aims to place the child sex offender disclosure scheme (Sarah’s law) on a statutory footing, ensuring consistency across police forces.

The session shows low levels of disagreement, primarily centered around the amendments proposed by opposition members, which did not significantly alter the course of the session or the passage of the clauses. The disagreement was evident but not intense, with most discussions showing a cooperative spirit and a shared goal of improving child protection laws. Here are detailed examples and reasoning:

1. Clause 42 Amendments: There was a mild disagreement over amendment 14 and the clause itself, but it was resolved quickly with the amendment being agreed to and the clause standing as part of the Bill. The opposition member, Harriet Cross, sought clarification on certain points, but her questions were answered satisfactorily by the Minister, Alex Davies-Jones.

2. Clause 43 Amendments: The opposition proposed amendment 42 and new clauses 47 to 49. While there was disagreement over these amendments, particularly on the need for a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs and the collection of ethnicity data, the discussions remained professional and focused. The Minister responded comprehensively to each amendment, explaining why they were not necessary or might duplicate existing efforts. The opposition’s amendment 42 was voted down, but the tone remained respectful and aimed at clarity and improvement.

3. Clause 45 Amendments: Similar to Clause 43, amendments 43, 46, 47, and 48 were discussed, with opposition members expressing concerns and proposing changes. The Minister responded with detailed explanations of the government’s approach and reasoning for not supporting the amendments. Despite the opposition’s efforts to press amendment 43 to a vote, which was subsequently negatived, the interactions were marked by a desire to ensure the effectiveness of the mandatory reporting duty rather than conflict for its own sake.

4. General Tone: Throughout the session, the tone was constructive and focused on improving legislative measures to protect children from sexual exploitation. Disagreements were expressed through questions and amendments aimed at refining the Bill rather than outright opposition to its principles. Members from both sides of the aisle expressed shared goals and intentions, with the government appreciating the opposition’s concerns while explaining their stance.

5. Specific Disagreements: The most notable disagreements were:

   • The opposition’s call for a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs (new clause 47), which was met with resistance from the government side, arguing that such inquiries would duplicate existing work.
   • The proposal for mandatory deportation for foreign nationals convicted of possessing child sexual abuse images (new clause 28), which raised concerns and a nuanced response from the Minister regarding existing deportation powers and their application.

Overall, the disagreements in this session were not intense or divisive, focusing more on technical adjustments and clarity rather than fundamental opposition to the Bill’s objectives. This is reflected in a rating of 2, indicating a session with minor disagreements that did not hinder the collaborative progress of the legislative process.