Debate contribution: Crime and Policing Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on 2 February 2026.

MLA

Mrs Naomi Long

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

2 February 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Crime and Policing Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5356349

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

I beg to move the following amendment:

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Crime and Policing Bill was introduced to Westminster on 25 February 2025. The provisions in the Bill that extend to Northern Ireland deal with tackling serious crime, economic crime, sexual-related crime and with increasing public safety across Northern Ireland. The provisions are primarily in the justice sphere, creating new offences and ways of more effectively dealing with serious and organised crime and the protection of victims. Members will be familiar with the contents of the Bill and will recall that I tabled an earlier legislative consent motion (LCM) that received the agreement of the Assembly on 23 June 2025. The contents of this LCM relate to amendments that were tabled at Commons Report Stage and Lords Committee Stage. The Department has engaged with the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission on the amendments. The commission advised that the European Convention on Human Rights analysis provided by the UK Government appears to be broadly sound and that the provisions in the Bill that will extend to Northern Ireland are compliant with article 2(1) of the Windsor framework. There are 12 provisions for which I seek the consent of the Assembly to extend to Northern Ireland; I will briefly elaborate on each of them. First is clause 36, a provision on the bulk and suspicious sale of knives. A new clause for Northern Ireland, "Duty to report remote sales of knives etc in bulk: Northern Ireland", would be inserted, replicating clause 36 for England and Wales. The clause would insert a new article 54B in the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 that would introduce a duty on sellers to report any reportable sales of bladed articles made remotely. A "reportable sale" of bladed articles means six or more knives sold in a single transaction or to the same buyer or residential premises in two or more transactions within a 30-day period. There would be a limited exception for a qualifying set of knives. A "qualifying set" means a set of at least three knives that differ in size or shape and are packaged for sale as a single item, such as a typical kitchen knife block. The purchase of one qualifying set would be treated as the purchase of a single knife. The purchase of two or more qualifying sets in a single transaction or in a 30-day period would be treated as a bulk sale. Sales in which the buyer informs the seller that they are carrying on a business and that they are registered for VAT or as a company are not reportable. The maximum penalty for the offence of failure to comply with the reporting requirement is a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. The clause would confer on the Department a power, subject to the negative resolution procedure, to prescribe by order the details of the reports and the reporting process regarding to whom reports must be made. That may include requirements about how reports are to be made — the method of submission and to whom they are to be submitted — when they are to be made and the information that they must include. The clause would also confer a power on the Department of Justice to amend by order, subject to the draft affirmative procedure, what constitutes a reportable sale, by varying the number of bladed articles or qualifying sets specified. I draw to Members' attention the possibility of a third LCM in the area. The Home Office was required to withdraw amendments that it had tabled to clauses 31 to 35 of the Bill as introduced, relating to strengthened age verification requirements for the online sale and delivery of knives and crossbows in England and Wales. The amendments, which would have extended the amended provisions to Scotland and Northern Ireland, were withdrawn due to a convention that prevents the UK Government from making contested amendments to the Bill at Lords Committee Stage. The UK Government intend to reintroduce the amendments at Lords Report Stage. Should there be an opportunity between the beginning and end of the Lords Report Stage, it would be my intention to table for Assembly debate a third LCM, dealing in particular with age verification. The second item that this LCM deals with relates to clauses 40 to 55 and schedule 5: the child criminal exploitation (CCE) offence and CCE prevention orders.

I am extending a new offence of child criminal exploitation, and the power to make CCE prevention orders, to Northern Ireland at clauses 40 to 55 and schedule 5. The new offence of CCE will seek to increase prosecutions by driving behavioural change and addressing evidential challenges with existing offences; act as a deterrent to gangs from eliciting children by charging them as child exploiters, with penalties to match; and improve the identification of victims. CCE prevention orders are designed to disrupt harmful and exploitative behaviour and protect children at risk. They are based on similar legal tools, such as slavery and trafficking prevention orders and sexual offences protection orders. The third element is a new clause to be inserted after clause 63 to provide for a new child sexual abuse image generator offence. That seeks to criminalise those who:

"make, adapt, possess, supply or offer to supply" —

anything —

"which is made or adapted for use for creating, or facilitating the creation of,"

child sexual abuse images. It will close a legislative gap to criminalise those who make available a generating tool to be used for the sole purpose of creating child sexual abuse images. Under current legislation, it is only an offence to produce, possess or distribute the images. The new provision will criminalise those who make the generating tools available. It seeks to reduce the alarming demand for, and possession of, digitised child sexual abuse materials, which have grown exponentially in recent years, as we debated at length last week. The fourth item is a new clause to be inserted after clause 84 around the AI testing defence. A new clause to be inserted would create statutory defences for authorised bodies or individuals testing AI models to investigate whether they have been:

"made or adapted for use for creating, or facilitating the creation of,"

child sexual abuse material, extreme pornography and non-consensual intimate images. Specifically, it would provide for an enabling power for the Secretary of State (SOS) for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) to make regulations with UK-wide extent to ensure that persons are enabled to carry out authorised technology testing without committing a criminal offence. One set of UK-wide regulations ensures consistency of approach in that delicate area. Before making such regulations, the DSIT SOS must consult my Department and Scottish Ministers. Testing the AI models will allow feedback to be provided to responsible technology companies, or enable them to directly test, to help them understand how their AI models may be misused so that those companies can take active steps to improve AI model safeguards, pre- and post-deployment, with the aim of preventing crime. The fifth element is a new clause to be inserted after clause 84 and deals with the issue of pornography depicting strangulation or suffocation. It will create two new offences of possessing or publishing pornographic images portraying, in an explicit and realistic way, a person strangling or suffocating another person. This clause implements a recommendation that was made in Baroness Bertin's independent review of pornography, which found that strangulation and suffocation pornographic content is rife on mainstream platforms, normalising that behaviour and having real-world impacts on how people are having sex, especially young people. Extension of the provision to Northern Ireland would send a clear message that that is not behaviour that should be normalised, that it is high risk and that it is, potentially, fatal. Again, we had a lengthy and helpful discussion about that last week. This is one of the positive things that we can do to try to challenge the growth in the number of those pornographic images. The sixth change is around clause 92(2), sex offender notification requirements and restrictions on driving licences in a new name. It is the last of a number of proposed measures of the Bill that I have sought to strengthen the sex offender notification requirements. It specifically supports the provision at clause 94(1), which was agreed as part of LCM 1. However, further engagement was needed with the Department for Infrastructure before I could bring the measure forward. Clause 94(2) will allow the Department for Infrastructure to make supporting regulations to provide a legal ability for the Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) to refuse a registered sex offender a replacement driving licence in a new name as part of the risk management requirements. Clause 94(2) will complete the overall clause and ensure that Northern Ireland remains aligned with other UK jurisdictions. The regulations would be subject to affirmative procedure. The seventh change is about stalking protection orders (SPOs) on acquittal and conviction. That is clauses 97 and 98 of the Bill. Part 6 of the Bill aims to tackle violence against women and girls by giving victims of stalking the right to know the identity of the perpetrator, alongside strengthening stalking protection orders. Clauses 97 and 98 will specifically give courts the power to impose stalking protection orders directly at conviction, or even on acquittal, if there is enough evidence to suggest that the defendant is still a risk to the victim. That will help to stop, for example, offenders contacting their victims from prison. Currently, applications for SPOs are made by police prior to conviction to provide early intervention and protection at the earliest opportunity. The intention is to ensure that SPOs can also be made at the conclusion of criminal proceedings as, since their introduction, it has become apparent that restraining orders are not the most appropriate tool in stalking cases, particularly as the courts cannot impose positive requirements on a defendant via a restraining order — such as, for example, attending a mental health assessment or handing in their mobile device to police. The eighth change is clause 100, which relates to stalking and is "Guidance about the disclosure of information by police forces". That provides a new measure to introduce a-right-to-know statutory guidance that aims to tell victims of stalking the identity of their abuser at the earliest opportunity and will empower and encourage police to release identifying information about anonymous stalking perpetrators to victims. The guidance will set out a clear process for police to follow so that victims can know who is threatening them. The ninth element is clause 104, which is "Child abduction". It is to protect children by closing a current gap in the law relating to child abduction to make it an offence for a parent, other guardian or carer who has lawfully taken a child out of the UK to detain that child abroad for longer than the permitted period without obtaining the appropriate consent or the authority of a court order. The tenth change, clause 105, is about the removal of the supervision exemption from the definition of "regulated activity". That is a Department of Health measure that has been included at the request of the Minister of Health. Clause 105 will remove the existing supervision exemption in the definition of "regulated activity" in Northern Ireland, which means that those who are currently in supervised roles are not eligible for an enhanced-with-barred-list check. Therefore, schools and other employers are not able to find out whether somebody who is working or volunteering closely and frequently with children on a supervised basis is barred from working in regulated activity with children by the Disclosure and Barring Service. The amendment means that everyone in such roles will be eligible for the highest level of criminal record check carried out by AccessNI and an enhanced check against the children's barred list, regardless of whether they are working under supervision or not. The eleventh element is clauses 130 to 137, clause 190 and schedule 19, which deal with access to remotely stored electronic data (RSED). Members will be aware that the use of technology plays an increasing role in tackling crime. It is important that legislation keeps pace with technological developments. We all increasingly use devices and store our data in the cloud or remotely rather than on the device itself. These new powers will take account of that development. The provisions aim to provide a clear legal basis for search and seizure of RSED and respond to recommendations from the Law Commission in England and Wales and the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation. The provisions will create a dedicated power for police and law enforcement agencies to extract information from one or multiple online accounts in criminal investigations, including counterterrorism and national security investigations. The provisions will ensure that, where police and other law enforcement agencies are already entitled to search and extract information from an electronic device, they can also access and extract remotely stored information connected to that device. The provisions include a number of safeguards to ensure that any interference with article 8 rights is necessary and proportionate and in the interests of national security, public safety and for the prevention of disorder or crime. The twelfth element is clause 138, which is "Access to driver licensing information". Clause 138 will enable the police to access Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) data automatically at the point of operational need for policing and law enforcement purposes beyond road traffic enforcement.

It is important to be clear with Members that the DVLA is responsible for driver licensing in GB only. Accordingly, the clause applies solely to GB driving licence records and has no impact on Northern Ireland licence holders. While the enhanced DVLA data is limited to GB driving licences, it will nonetheless deliver operational benefits for policing where it can be lawfully applied. In particular, it will support faster and more reliable identity verification, support for serious and organised crime investigations, safeguarding activity and the location of missing or vulnerable persons.

Access to DVLA data will be strictly governed by regulations and a statutory code of practice. The regulations will have the force of law and will set binding requirements covering who can access the data, lawful use, mandatory training, data handling and security. All organisations, including the PSNI, will be required to sign up to and comply with that code of practice before they are permitted to access DVLA data. Crucially, I have secured additional safeguards in respect of Northern Ireland. They include a requirement for my formal consent before the regulations can be commenced in Northern Ireland and a commitment that the code of practice will include a dedicated Northern Ireland section developed collaboratively with my Department. The regulations and code of practice will be shared in due course with the Justice Committee. In addition, the Secretary of State for the Home Department will be required to publish an annual report detailing how the enhanced powers have operated in practice, the benefits realised for public protection and public safety, how compliance with the code of practice has been supported and assured and whether the use of data has raised any concerns in relation to specific organisations. I fully appreciate that the Assembly's preference is to legislate on Northern Ireland matters where possible, and, indeed, that is my preference. The Bill is in its final stages in Parliament, and, with the legislative constraints in the current mandate, it would not be possible to bring equivalent provision via an Assembly Bill in the near future. I believe that, on this occasion, therefore, it is appropriate that the amendments be made in a Westminster Bill, and I again ask for the support of the House in passing the motion. Before I conclude, I thank the Justice Committee for its report. I welcome its support for the LCM. I also thank Executive colleagues for their consideration of the issues. It has been something of a long and winding road — I will not break into song, you will be glad to hear — but it has been quite complex with the changes that are happening in Westminster and keeping abreast of that, so I appreciate people's patience while we navigated to where we are today. Thank you for your consideration of the motion. I look forward to your contributions to the debate.

2,746 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:18 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification