Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

(Limited Text - Ministerial Extracts only)

Consideration of Commons amendments & Lords Hansard - Part 2
Tuesday 22nd March 2022 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendment 73, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 73A, do agree with the Commons in their Amendment 74A, do not insist on its Amendment 87 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 87A, 87B, 87C, 87D, 87E and 87F to the words restored to the Bill by the Commons disagreement to Lords Amendment 87.

73A: Because it is appropriate for the police to be able to attach conditions to a public procession where the noise generated by persons taking part in the procession may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried out in the vicinity of the procession or may have a significant relevant impact on persons in the vicinity of the procession.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Williams of Trafford) (Con)]

My Lords, with the leave of the House I will also speak to Motions F, F1, F2, G, H, H1 and N.

I shall begin with Amendment 143, as I believe that there is a large measure of agreement across the House on the need to better protect schools and vaccination centres from disruptive protests that take place outside such locations. The Government have listened carefully to the arguments put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, for introducing fast-tracked public spaces protection orders on a case-by-case basis.

Amendments 143A to 143C are similar to Amendment 143. They make provision for expedited PSPOs, which local authorities can apply to public places around schools, and to vaccine and test-and-trace centres, for up to six months. As with the original amendment, an expedited PSPO would need to be made with the consent of the relevant chief officer of police and, as the case may be, the appropriate authority for the school or NHS body in question. The local authority would then be required to consult on the expedited PSPO once it was in place. These amendments in lieu were welcomed by the shadow Policing Minister in the Commons, and I hope they will be similarly accepted by the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, and others.

It is the Government’s view that we must balance the rights of protesters to exercise their freedom of speech and assembly with the rights of non-protestors who might be adversely affected by a protest. Part 3 of this Bill has always been about a modest resetting of that balance, and it firmly remains our view that the provisions in Clauses 55, 56 and 61, which Amendments 73, 80 and 87 seek wholly or partly to expunge, should remain part of the Bill.

Noble Lords will recall that Amendments 73 and 87 relate to measures that would enable the police to attach conditions to a protest in circumstances relating to the generation of noise. As I have said to the House before, but it is worth saying again, we expect the vast majority of protests to be unaffected by these provisions. It is exceptional for the police to attach any conditions to a protest, and that will not change. Of course, protests are generally by their nature noisy; their purpose is to advance a particular cause. These measures do not prevent noisy protests, but the Government continue to believe that it is completely unacceptable that a small minority of protestors can, through the use of amplification equipment or other means, impose disruption and misery upon the public through the excessive noise they generate. The noble Lord, Lord Hogan-Howe, put it well in Committee:

“We have to consider its effect on people, where it is either so loud or so persistent that it cannot be ignored.”—[Official Report, 24/11/21; col. 944.]


If we accept that there must be limitations on egregious noise in other contexts—that is why local authorities have noise abatement powers—the same principle should apply in the context of a protest where the level of noise becomes injurious to others.

Amendment 80 would remove Clause 56. This clause would enable the police to attach any type of condition to a public assembly, in the same way that they can attach any type of condition to a public procession. The distinction between processions and assemblies no longer reflects the contemporary realities of policing protests over three and a half decades after the Public Order Act was enacted. This point has forcefully been made both by the national policing lead for public order, Chief Constable Harrington, and by Her Majesty’s inspectors of constabulary. We should recognise their expertise in this regard and accept that the 1986 Act needs to be updated.

Turning to Amendments 81 and 82, I am grateful for the further opportunity I have had to discuss them with the noble Viscount, Lord Colville. The noble Viscount has made a powerful point that the Palace of Westminster is the symbolic representation of our vibrant democracy and that it must be open to those who want to do so to protest in the vicinity of these Houses of Parliament. I want again to reassure the House that Clause 58 will not have the effect that some noble Lords have feared.

Since our last debate, we have discussed this further with the Greater London Authority, which has categorically confirmed that, were Clause 58 in its original form to be enacted, it will continue to authorise rallies and protests, as it currently does, on the GLA-managed area of Parliament Square Garden.

Since I had the opportunity to discuss this further with the noble Viscount last week, my officials have also been in touch with the Metropolitan Police, and it has similarly confirmed that the provisions in Clause 58 do not affect its ability to manage large protests of 5,000 people or more within Parliament Square. I should stress that it is not the function of the Metropolitan Police to authorise or otherwise protests in the vicinity of Parliament but to exercise its powers under the Public Order Act to attach conditions to a protest. The Metropolitan Police has also reassured us that, as with other public order powers, it will use this new power of direction only in a manner that is reasonable, necessary and proportionate to the rights of individuals to engage in peaceful protest.

As we are talking about the Houses of Parliament, I think this might be a good moment to reflect on the death of PC Palmer, five years ago today. I cannot believe it was five years ago, but it is. We pay tribute to him for the way he tried to protect the Palace when he was murdered.

Finally, moving to Amendment 88, this is a watered-down version of the Government’s plan to increase the maximum penalty for the existing offence of obstructing a highway. It is vital that we protect all our roads from the disruptive and damaging actions that we have seen some protestors employ in recent months. Limiting this increase to the strategic road network only, which excludes most A roads, as well as more minor roads, as this amendment seeks to do, would allow individuals to continue to block our roads without facing the appropriate sanction. I should stress that we are increasing the maximum penalty for this offence. It would continue to be for the court to decide the appropriate sentence in any particular case, and I would expect the sentence imposed to reflect the harm caused.

We have listened to and reflected on the concerns raised by noble Lords on Report. As is entirely proper, this House asked the other place to think again. It has now done so. The elected House has now endorsed, not once but twice, the provisions in the Bill enabling the police to attach conditions to a protest relating to the generation of noise. The elected House has also disagreed, following separate Divisions, with the Lords amendments relating to the policing of assemblies and protests in the vicinity of Parliament. We have done our duty as a revising Chamber, but now that the Commons has clearly expressed its view, I put it to the House that it is time to let this Bill pass. I commend the Commons reasons and amendments to the House.

Motion E1 (as an amendment to Motion E)

[Lord Coaker]

Moved by

Leave out from “House” and insert “do insist on its Amendment 73, do disagree with the Commons in their Amendment 74A and propose Amendment 74B to Lords Amendment 74 in lieu and Amendments 74C, 74D, 74E, 74F and 74G as consequential amendments, and do insist on its Amendment 87 and disagree with the Commons in their Amendments 87A, 87B, 87C, 87D, 87E and 87F—

74B: Leave out lines 20 to 26


74C: As an amendment to Lords Amendment 75, leave out “any of subsections (2ZA) to (2ZC)” and insert “subsection (2ZA) or (2ZB)”


74D: As an amendment to Lords Amendment 76, leave out “any” and insert “either”


74E: As an amendment to the Bill, page 47, leave out lines 36 and 37


74F: As an amendment to the Bill, page 47, line 40, leave out “an expression mentioned in subsection 12(a) or (b)” and insert “that expression”


74G: As an amendment to the Bill, page 47, leave out lines 44 and 45

--- Later in debate ---

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, before we vote on this Motion, I invite Members to consider what the history of our country would have been like if the laws that the Government are proposing had been in place at the time. We are very proud of the development of parliamentary democracy in this country, but I can think of major occasions in the past when major change took place which was quite right and very noisy. Do you think that the Chartist demonstration that took place two miles from here at Kennington was noiseless? Were the suffragettes and suffragists who waged the campaign to give women the right to vote somehow noiseless? They were noisy. Do you think that the poll tax demonstrations were noiseless? They were noisy, and the Government of the day finally realised that it was a mistaken policy. I modestly mention to your Lordships that this legislation will unleash terrible trouble in the future. I do not know what kind or when, and I am not a barrister so I will not benefit personally from any of the legal cases that will arise, but it will cause trouble and it should not be passed.

[Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con)]

My Lords, I cannot see anyone trying to get up. If they are doing, they are probably behind me; do not encourage them. I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, that we always keep all legislation under review. The Minister in the other place, in saying that, was not saying anything unusual.

I am glad that I give the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, the opportunity to vent at every piece of legislation that I bring into this House, because we are friends and I feel that it is some form of therapy for her. I do not know why she was picking out the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, for not supporting her, but that is probably a side issue that I do not know anything about. She talked about reading the public mood, and I will get on to that and the facts behind the public mood shortly; I warn her that she will not like it. About Putin’s Russia, or indeed Ukraine, I do not want to make a cheap point but I see the point about democracy. The people of Ukraine or Russia will look at this Parliament and realise how very lucky we are that we can not only argue but shout at each other and the majority wins. Noble Lords will be particularly pleased because there is generally a majority against the Government in this place.

Amendments 143A to 143C provide for the expedited public spaces protection orders. I am glad that they find favour with the noble Lord, Lord Coaker. In doing so, clearly he makes the distinction between noise generally, noisy protests and noise that is injurious to others, as evidenced by his amendments.

I welcome the noble Lord’s acceptance of the decision taken by the other place in relation to the increase in the maximum penalty for the offence of obstructing a highway as reflected in Amendment 88A. I am sorry that the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, takes a different view, but I hope she will not press Motion H1, given that the courts are able to take into account the level of disruption when sentencing for this offence.

I know the noble Viscount, Lord Colville, is not in his place, but I want to make the point that we have had a very constructive discussion on Amendments 81 and 82. I hope that he will have heard it remotely. Like him, we want to monitor carefully the impact of Clause 58 to ensure that it does not have the unintended consequences of inhibiting large protests in the vicinity of Parliament. I was particularly struck by our conversation: when I was coming into Parliament on my bike this morning—I know noble Lords are very impressed—there was an ambulance trying to get into Parliament, and it kind of illustrated the point for me.

Amendments 73, 80 and 87 relate to the powers of the police—not the Government or the Secretary of State—to attach conditions to protests, including, in particular, in relation to the generation of noise. I know that noble Lords continue to have concerns about these provisions, and I hear that in the House today. I think they are unfounded, and I say again that the provisions do not ban noisy protests; the overwhelming majority of protests will be unaffected by these provisions. But are noble Lords really saying that any amount of noise, in any situation, at any time and for any length of time, is acceptable if it is generated by protestors? The amendments of the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, clearly demonstrate that it is not. The Government do not subscribe to this view and nor does the majority of the British public. Back to the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb: we have seen in a recent YouGov poll that 53% of respondents supported giving senior police officers powers to set noise limits on protests, compared to just 33% of respondents opposing the measure.

As I said in my opening remarks, the elected House has now endorsed the noise-related measures on two separate occasions during the passage of this Bill. They have the support of the British public that they should now be allowed to pass. I invite the House to reject Motion E1.

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reply and all noble Lords who have responded to the debate on my amendment. I do not want to detain the House because there is a lot of other business to pursue. Let me just say that the noise provision is the one we really object to. I think that, if it is passed, in a year or two years, a senior police officer will restrict a demonstration on the basis of noise. The Minister has prayed in aid public opinion in her favour. The public will ask who on earth passed legislation that means they cannot demonstrate in a democracy in their own country—who allowed that to happen? It will be this Parliament, and for that reason I press Motion E1.

--- Later in debate ---

16:27

Division 3

Ayes: 208

Noes: 166

--- Later in debate ---

Motion F

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

Moved by

That this House do not insist on its Amendment 80 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 80A, 80B, 80C, 80D, 80E and 80F to the words restored to the Bill by the Commons disagreement to Lords Amendment 80.

80A: Page 48, line 40, at end insert—


““(2ZA) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), the cases in which a public assembly


in England and Wales may result in serious disruption to the life of the community include, in particular, where—


(a) it may result in a significant delay to the supply of a time-sensitive product to consumers of that product, or


(b) it may result in a prolonged disruption of access to any essential goods or any essential service, including, in particular, access to—


(i) the supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel,


(ii) a system of communication,


(iii) a place of worship,


(iv) a transport facility,


(v) an educational institution, or (vi) a service relating to health.


(2ZB) In subsection (2ZA)(a) “time-sensitive product” means a product whose value or use to its consumers may be significantly reduced by a delay in the supply of the product to them.


(2ZC) For the purposes of subsection (1)(aa), the cases in which the noise generated by persons taking part in a public assembly may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried on in the vicinity of the assembly include, in particular, where it may result in persons connected with the organisation not being reasonably able, for a prolonged period of time, to carry on in that vicinity the activities or any one of them.”


80B: Page 49, line 13, leave out “make” and insert “amend any of subsections (2ZA) to (2ZC) for the purposes of making”


80C: Page 49, line 18, after “particular” insert “, amend any of those subsections for the purposes of”


80D: Page 49, line 19, leave out “define” and insert “defining”


80E: Page 49, line 21, leave out “give” and insert “giving”


80F: Page 49, line 31, at end insert “, including provision which makes consequential amendments to this Part.”

[Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con)]

My Lords, I have already spoken to Motion F and I beg to move.

Motion F1 (as an amendment to Motion F) not moved.

--- Later in debate ---

16:42

Division 4

Ayes: 190

Noes: 175

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendments 81 and 82, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reasons 81A and 82A.

81A: Because it is not appropriate to enable authorisation to be given for obstruction of access to the Parliamentary Estate.


82A: Because it is not appropriate to enable authorisation to be given for obstruction of access to the Parliamentary Estate.

Motion G agreed.

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment 88A.

88A: Leave out lines 5 to 9 and insert—


“(2) In subsection (1)—


(a) after “liable to” insert “imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or”;


(b) for “not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale” substitute “or both”.”

Motion H1 not moved.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendments 89 and 146 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 146A and 146B in lieu.

146A: Page 56, line 32, at end insert the following new Clause—


“Repeal of the Vagrancy Act 1824 etc


(1) The Vagrancy Act 1824 is repealed.


(2) Subsections (3) to (7) contain amendments and repeals in consequence of subsection (1).


(3) The following are repealed— (a) the Vagrancy Act 1935;


(b) section 2(3)(c) of the House to House Collections Act 1939 (licences);


(c) section 20 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 (power of magistrates’ court to commit on bail for sentence);


(d) in the Criminal Justice Act 1982—


(i) section 70 and the italic heading immediately before that section (vagrancy offences), and


(ii) paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 and the italic heading immediately before that paragraph (minor and consequential amendments);


(e) section 43(5) of the Mental Health Act 1983 (power of magistrates’ courts to commit for restriction order);


(f) section 26(5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 (alteration of certain penalties);


(g) in the Criminal Justice Act 2003—


(i) paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 25 and the italic heading immediately before those paragraphs (summary offences no longer punishable with imprisonment), and


(ii) paragraphs 145 and 146 of Schedule 32 and the italic heading immediately before those paragraphs (amendments relating to sentencing);


(h) paragraph 18 of Schedule 8 to the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (powers of accredited persons).


(4) In section 81 of the Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1907 (extending definition of public place and street for certain purposes), omit the words from “shall”, in the first place it occurs, to “public place, and”.


(5) In section 48(2) of the Forestry Act 1967 (powers of entry and enforcement), omit “or against the Vagrancy Act 1824”.


(6) In the Police Reform Act 2002—


(a) in Schedule 3C (powers of community support officers and community support volunteers)—


(i) omit paragraph 3(3)(b), (ii) omit paragraph 7(3), (iii) in paragraph 7(4), omit “or (3)”, and (iv) in paragraph 7(7)(a), omit “or (3)”, and


(b) in Schedule 5 (powers exercisable by accredited persons), omit paragraph 2(3)(aa).


(7) In the Sentencing Code—


(a) in section 20(1) (committal in certain cases where offender committed in respect of another offence)—(i) at the end of paragraph (e), insert “or”, and


(ii) omit paragraph (g) (and the “or” immediately before it), and


(b) omit section 24(1)(f) (further powers to commit offender to the Crown Court to be dealt with).


(8) The amendments and repeals made by this section do not apply in relation to an offence committed before this section comes into force.”


146B: Page 194, line 22, after “61” insert “, (Repeal of the Vagrancy Act 1824 etc)”

[Lord Best (CB)]

My Lords, I hope the House will indulge me if I say a few concluding words about Motion J on the repeal of the Vagrancy Act, with my sincere apologies that I failed to speak during the earlier debate. I welcome the Commons Amendments 146A and 146B in lieu of Lords Amendments 89 and 146, which were passed by your Lordships on 17 January. The Commons version covers the same ground as our amendments and will finally repeal the notorious Vagrancy Act 1824. This means that being homeless and sleeping rough will no longer make you a criminal.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendment 107, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 107A.

107A: Because the amendment is unnecessary as there is no legal barrier to local authorities setting up and running academies.

Motion K agreed.

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendments 114, 115 and 116 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 116A and 116B in lieu.

116A: Page 137, line 5, at end insert—


“(3A) A report under subsection (3) must in particular include—


(a) information about the number of offenders in respect of whom serious violence reduction orders have been made;


(b) information about the offences that were the basis for applications as a result of which serious violence reduction orders were made;


(c) information about the exercise by constables of the powers in section 342E of the Sentencing Code (serious violence reduction orders: powers of constables);


(d) an assessment of the impact of the operation of Chapter 1A of Part 11 of the Sentencing Code on people with protected characteristics (within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010);


(e) an initial assessment of the impact of serious violence reduction orders on the reoffending rates of offenders in respect of whom such orders have been made;


(f) an assessment of the impact on offenders of being subject to a serious violence reduction order;


(g) information about the number of offences committed under section 342G of the Sentencing Code (offences relating to a serious violence reduction order) and the number of suspected offences under that section that have been investigated.”


116B: Page 137, line 22, after “section” insert—


“serious violence reduction order” has the same meaning as in Chapter 1A of Part 11 of the Sentencing Code (see section 342B of the Sentencing Code);”

Motion L agreed.

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendments 141 and 142, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reasons 141A and 142A.

141A: Because conduct requiring or arranging sexual relations as a condition of accommodation may already constitute an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and the Government is committed to undertaking a consultation on whether the law in respect of such conduct needs to be strengthened.


142A: Because conduct requiring or arranging sexual relations as a condition of accommodation may already constitute an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and the Government is committed to undertaking a consultation on whether the law in respect of such conduct needs to be strengthened.

Motion M agreed.

Moved by

[Baroness Williams of Trafford]

That this House do not insist on its Amendment 143 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 143A, 143B and 143C in lieu.

143A Page 56, line 32, at end insert—


“Expedited public spaces protection orders


(1) The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 is amended as follows.


(2) After section 59 insert—


“59A Power to make expedited public spaces protection orders


(1) A local authority may make an expedited public spaces protection order (an “expedited order”) in relation to a public place within the local authority’s area if satisfied on reasonable grounds that three conditions are met.


(2) The first condition is that the public place is in the vicinity of—


(a) a school in the local authority’s area, or


(b) a site in the local authority’s area where, or from which—


(i) vaccines are provided to members of the public by, or pursuant to arrangements with, an NHS body, or (ii) test and trace services are provided.


The reference in paragraph (b)(i) to arrangements includes arrangements made by the NHS body in the exercise of functions of another person by virtue of any provision of the National Health Service Act 2006.


(3) The second condition is that activities carried on, or likely to be carried on, in the public place by one or more individuals in the course of a protest or demonstration have had, or are likely to have, the effect of—


(a) harassing or intimidating members of staff or volunteers at the school or site,


(b) harassing or intimidating persons using the services of the school or site,


(c) impeding the provision of services by staff or volunteers at the school or site, or


(d) impeding access by persons seeking to use the services of the school or site.


(4) The third condition is that the effect or likely effect mentioned in subsection (3)—


(a) is, or is likely to be, of a persistent or continuing nature,


(b) is, or is likely to be, such as to make the activities unreasonable, and


(c) justifies the restrictions imposed by the order.


(5) An expedited order is an order that identifies the public place referred to in subsection (1) (“the restricted area”) and— (a) prohibits specified things being done in the restricted area,


(b) requires specified things to be done by persons carrying on specified activities in that area, or (c) does both of those things.


(6) The only prohibitions or requirements that may be imposed are ones that are reasonable to impose in order—


(a) to prevent the harassment, intimidation or impediment referred to in subsection (3) from continuing, occurring or recurring, or


(b) to reduce that harassment, intimidation or impediment or to reduce the risk of its continuance, occurrence or recurrence.


(7) A prohibition or requirement may be framed—


(a) so as to apply to all persons, or only to persons in specified categories, or to all persons except those in specified categories;


(b) so as to apply at all times, or only at specified times, or at all times except those specified;


(c) so as to apply in all circumstances, or only in specified circumstances, or in all circumstances except those specified.


(8) An expedited order must—


(a) identify the activities referred to in subsection (3);


(b) explain the effect of section 63 (where it applies) and section 67;


(c) specify the period for which the order has effect.


(9) An expedited order may not be made in relation to a public place if that place (or any part of it) is or has been the subject of an expedited order (“the earlier order”), unless the period specified in subsection (11) has expired.


(10) In subsection (9) the second reference to “an expedited order” is to be read as including a reference to a public spaces protection order (made after the day on which this section comes into force) which neither prohibited nor required anything that could not have been prohibited or required by an expedited order.


(11) The period specified in this subsection is the period of a year beginning with the day on which the earlier order ceased to have effect.


(12) An expedited order must be published in accordance with regulations made by the Secretary of State.


(13) For the purposes of subsection (2), a public place that is coextensive with, includes, or is wholly or partly within, a school or site is regarded as being “in the vicinity of” that school or site.


(14) In this section references to a “school” are to be read as including a 16 to 19 Academy.


(15) In this section “test and trace services” means—


(a) in relation to England, services of the programme known as NHS Test and Trace;


(b) in relation to Wales, services of the programme known as Test, Trace, Protect.”


(3) After section 60 insert—


“60A Duration of expedited orders


(1) An expedited order may not have effect for a period of more than 6 months.


(2) Subject to subsection (1), the local authority that made an expedited order may, before the time when the order is due to expire, extend the period for which the order has effect if satisfied on reasonable grounds that doing so is necessary to prevent—


(a) occurrence or recurrence after that time of the activities identified in the order, or


(b) an increase in the frequency or seriousness of those activities after that time.


(3) Where a local authority has made an expedited order, the authority may, at any time before the order is due to expire, reduce the period for which the order is to have effect if satisfied on reasonable grounds that the reduced period will be sufficient having regard to the degree of risk of an occurrence, recurrence or increase such as is mentioned in subsection (2)(a) or (b).


(4) An extension or reduction under this section of the period for which an order has effect must be published in accordance with regulations made by the Secretary of State.


(5) An expedited order may be extended or reduced under this section more than once.”


(4) After section 72 insert—


“72A Expedited orders: Convention rights and consents


(1) A local authority, in deciding—


(a) whether to make an expedited order (under section 59A) and if so what it should include,


(b) whether to extend or reduce the period for which an expedited order has effect (under section 60A) and if so by how much,


(c) whether to vary an expedited order (under section 61) and if so how, or


(d) whether to discharge an expedited order (under section 61), must have particular regard to the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly set out in articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.


(2) In subsection (1) “Convention” has the meaning given by section 21(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998.


(3) A local authority must obtain the necessary consents before—


(a) making an expedited order,


(b) extending or reducing the period for which an expedited order has effect, or


(c) varying or discharging an expedited order.


(4) If the order referred to in subsection (3) was made, or is proposed to be made, in reliance on section 59A(2)(a), “the necessary consents” means the consent of—


(a) the chief officer of police for the police area that includes the restricted area, and


(b) a person authorised (whether in specific or general terms) by the appropriate authority for the school or 16 to 19 Academy.


(5) If the order referred to in subsection (3) was made, or is proposed to be made, in reliance on section 59A(2)(b), “the necessary consents” means the consent of—


(a) the chief officer of police for the police area that includes the restricted area, and


(b) a person authorised by the appropriate NHS authority.


(6) In this section—


“appropriate authority” means—


(a) in relation to a school maintained by a local authority, the governing body;


(b) in relation to any other school or a 16 to 19 Academy, the proprietor;


“appropriate NHS authority” means—


(a) if the order was made, or is proposed to be made, in reliance on sub-paragraph (i) of section 59A(2)(b), the NHS body mentioned in that sub-paragraph;


(b) if the order was made, or is proposed to be made, in reliance on sub-paragraph (ii) of section 59A(2)(b) and the site is in England, the UK Health Security Agency;


(c) if the order was made, or is proposed to be made, in reliance on that sub-paragraph and the site is in Wales, the Local Health Board for the area in which the site is located.


(7) In this section “proprietor”, in relation to a school or a 16 to 19 Academy, has the meaning given in section 579(1) of the Education Act 1996.


72B Consultation and notifications after making expedited order


(1) A local authority must carry out the necessary consultation as soon as reasonably practicable after making an expedited order.


(2) In subsection (1) “necessary consultation” means consulting with the following about the terms and effects of the order—


(a) the chief officer of police, and the local policing body, for the police area that includes the restricted area;


(b) whatever community representatives the local authority thinks it appropriate to consult;


(c) the owner or occupier of land within the restricted area.


(3) A local authority must carry out the necessary notification (if any) as soon as reasonably practicable after—


(a) making an expedited order,


(b) extending or reducing the period for which an expedited order has effect, or


(c) varying or discharging an expedited order.


(4) In subsection (3) “necessary notification” means notifying the following of the extension, reduction, variation or discharge—


(a) the parish council or community council (if any) for the area that includes the restricted area;


(b) in the case of an expedited order made by a district council in England, the county council (if any) for the area that includes the restricted area;


(c) the owner or occupier of land within the restricted area.


(5) The requirement to notify the owner or occupier of land within the restricted area—


(a) does not apply to land that is owned or occupied by the local authority;


(b) applies only if, and to the extent that, it is reasonably practicable to notify the owner or occupier of the land.”


(5) Schedule (Expedited public spaces protection orders) contains amendments relating to subsections (1) to (4).”


143B: Page 220, line 15, at end insert the following new Schedule—


“SCHEDULE


EXPEDITED PUBLIC SPACES PROTECTION ORDERS


1 The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 is amended as follows.


2 In the heading of Chapter 2 of Part 4, at the end insert “and expedited orders”.


3 In the italic heading before section 59, at the end insert “and expedited orders”.


4 In the heading of section 59 (power to make orders), before “orders” insert “public spaces protection”.


5 In the heading of section 60 (duration of orders), after “of” insert “public spaces protection”.


6 (1) Section 61 (variation and discharge of orders) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsection (1), in the words before paragraph (a), after “protection order” insert “or expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (2), for “make a variation under subsection (1)(a)” substitute “under subsection (1)(a) make a variation to a public spaces protection order”.


(4) After subsection (2) insert—


“(2A) A local authority may under subsection (1)(a) make a variation to an expedited order that results in the order applying to an area to which it did not previously apply only if the conditions in section


59A(2) to (4) are met as regards that area.”


(5) In subsection (3), after “59(5)” insert “or 59A(6) (as the case may be)”.


(6) In subsection (4), after “order” insert “or expedited order”.


7 (1) Section 62 (premises etc to which alcohol prohibition does not apply) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsection (1), in the words before paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (2), in the words before paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or an expedited order”.


8 In section 63 (consumption of alcohol in breach of prohibition order), in subsection (1)—


(a) in paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or an expedited order”;


(b) in the words after paragraph (b) omit “public spaces protection”.


9 (1) Section 64 (orders restricting public right of way over highway) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsection (1), in the words before paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or expedited order”.


(3) After subsection (1) insert—


“(1A) Before making a public spaces protection order that restricts the public right of way over a highway, a local authority must take the prior consultation steps (see subsection (2)).


(1B) A local authority may not make an expedited order that restricts the public right of way over a highway unless it—


(a) takes the prior consultation steps before making the order, or


(b) takes the subsequent consultation steps (see subsection (2A)) as soon as reasonably practicable after making the order.”


(4) In subsection (2), for the words from “Before” to “must” substitute “To take the “prior consultation steps” in relation to an order means to”.


(5) After subsection (2) insert—


“(2A) To take the “subsequent consultation steps” in relation to an expedited order means to—


(a) notify potentially affected persons of the order,


(b) invite those persons to make representations within a specified period about the terms and effects of the order,


(c) inform those persons how they can see a copy of the order, and


(d) consider any representations made.


The definition of “potentially affected persons” in subsection (2) applies to this subsection as if the reference there to “the proposed order” were to “the order”.”


(6) After subsection (3) insert—


“(3B) Where a local authority proposes to make an expedited order restricting the public right of way over a highway that is also within the area of another local authority it must, if it thinks appropriate to do so, consult that other authority before, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, making the order.”


(7) In subsections (4), (5), (6), (7) and (8), after “order” insert “or expedited order”.


10 In section 65 (categories of highway over which public right of way may not be restricted), in subsection (1), in the words before paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or an expedited order”.


11 (1) Section 66 (challenging validity of orders) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsections (1) and (6), after “public spaces protection order”, in each place it occurs, insert “or an expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (7), in the words before paragraph (a)—


(a) after “order”, in the first place it occurs, insert “or an expedited order”;


(b) for “a public spaces protection”, in the second place it occurs, substitute “such an”.


12 (1) Section 67 (offence of failing to comply with order) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsections (1) and (4), after “order”, in each place it occurs, insert “or an expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (3), after “order” insert “or expedited order”.


13 (1) Section 68 (fixed penalty notices) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsection (1), at the end insert “or an expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (3), at the end insert “or expedited order”.


14 In section 70 (byelaws), after “protection order” insert “or an expedited order”.


15 (1) Section 71 (bodies other than local authorities with statutory functions in relation to land) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsections (3) to (5), after “public spaces protection order”, in each place it occurs, insert “or an expedited order”.


(3) In subsection (6)—


(a) in paragraph (a), after “order” insert “or expedited order”;


(b) in paragraph (b)(i), after “order” insert “, or an expedited order,”.


16 In the heading of section 72 (Convention rights, consultation, publicity and notification), at the beginning insert “Public spaces protection orders:”


17 (1) Section 74 (interpretation of Chapter 2 of Part 4) is amended as follows.


(2) In subsection (1)—


(a) at the appropriate places insert—


““16 to 19 Academy” has the meaning given by section 1B of the Academies Act 2010;”;


““expedited order” has the meaning given by section 59A(1);”;


““Local Health Board” means a Local Health Board established under section 11 of the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006;”;


““NHS body” has the meaning given in section 275 of the National Health Service Act 2006;”;


““school” has the meaning given by section 4 of the


Education Act 1996.”;


(b) for the definition of “restricted area” substitute—


““restricted area”—


(a) in relation to a public spaces protection order, has the meaning given by section 59(4);


(b) in relation to an expedited order, has the meaning given by section 59A(5).”


(3) After subsection (2) insert—


“(3) For the purposes of this Chapter, an expedited order “regulates” an activity if the activity is—


(a) prohibited by virtue of section 59A(5)(a), or


(b) subjected to requirements by virtue of section 59A(5)(b), whether or not for all persons and at all times.””


143C: Page 195, line 27, at end insert—


“(ka) section (Expedited public spaces protection orders) for the purposes of making regulations;”

Motions N agreed.