Latest news with #Crime&PolicingBill
Spectator
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The Church of England needs to lead
There was a unique focus on life and death in parliament last week, with critical votes on the decriminalisation of abortion and legalisation of assisted dying. Both propositions affect the interests of the most vulnerable. So what, I wondered, was the Established Church's take on them? In recalling the now-retired Archbishop of Canterbury's strident interventions on matters for elected politicians – from benefit cuts and border control to a 'no deal' Brexit – not to mention the Church's costly self-flagellation over reparations, one might expect its leadership to be equally robust in defending the unborn, the sick, and the welfare of mothers. But truth be told, as I began my search, I was actually seeking confirmation. Confirmation of a suspicion I have had since the pandemic (when church doors stayed closed rather too enthusiastically) that on the crunchiest spiritual and moral issues of the day, the Church of England's leadership finds it all a bit uncomfortable. On decriminalisation, I looked for public proclamations emanating from the offices of both Canterbury and York – since we are currently in an archbishop interregnum. There were prayers for Ahmedabad, the Middle East and Father's Day. There was a daily exploration of the Lord's Prayer, and a post heralding Refugee Week 2025. In advance of last week's votes, however, there was not even a gentle, opinion-free prayer for parliamentarians ahead of some challenging decisions. Perhaps those abortion votes were so briskly whisked through that the Church's leadership missed that they were coming. Backbench MPs were granted 45 minutes to state their views on three amendments that had been hooked onto the Crime & Policing Bill. The first of them was voted through with a stonking majority and amounts to the biggest change to abortion law in 50 years. A woman will now be able to end her pregnancy herself – beyond existing limits and at any stage up to birth – without legal consequence. It is a profound change that leaves the unborn child and women themselves extraordinarily vulnerable. The combination of the rushed decriminalisation amendment with the 'pills by post' regime is highly dangerous. This temporary regime was imposed during the pandemic but made permanent after another last-minute parliamentary ambush. It means that women can access tablets to abort a baby in the womb at ten weeks' gestation through just a phone or video call with a medic. Evidence now suggests that these pills have on several occasions got into the hands of abusive partners or been taken by women well beyond ten weeks, with grim results. The tiny number of criminal investigations of women that have ensued have been used as justification for last week's sweeping amendments. Decriminalisation campaigners counter that existing abortion limits remain enforceable because medics and others are still bound by them and can therefore be prosecuted for carrying out or coercing someone to have an abortion. But the decriminalisation of the woman herself changes the game, just as previous incremental abortion reforms have brought us to this point. There was a near total absence of any discussion of morality in relation to the unborn child It will be incredibly difficult to prosecute a partner who has coerced a woman to abort her child if the act of that abortion itself is no longer a crime. What's more, I suspect these laws will result in some tragic cases of women aborting babies at home alone, with the babies surviving for some hours after birth or being terribly injured. The woman herself will risk life-threatening complications like postpartum haemorrhage. At which point the cry will understandably go out for such procedures to take place under supervision without medics being criminalised either – making legal time limits redundant. It is not often that I cannot sleep for fear of the consequences of what parliament has done. However, this week I have lain awake imagining the horror of those situations, yearning for the protection of those tiny bodies and traumatised women. I noticed in the debate that there was a near total absence of any discussion of morality in relation to the unborn child. In my speech, I pointed out the inconvenient truth for proponents of decriminalisation, that abortion does not just involve one body – it involves two. I hold the seemingly controversial view that those unborn children deserve recognition in this debate. I was outnumbered, so it is now over to the House of Lords, where I hope the decriminalisation amendment receives the scrutiny it failed to get in the Commons. It will be interesting to see now whether the Lords Spiritual, including the Church of England's senior leadership, choose to engage in its consequences. I find it curious that, at least publicly, there is no evidence that ahead of these votes there was any vigorous debate or soul searching in the upper echelons of the Church. After the vote, a Church House spokesman came out to say that women ought not to be criminalised but that this very significant change was 'worrying'. In the vacuum, a call went out from Revd Richard Bastable, Vicar of St Luke's, Hammersmith, for clergy to message him if they wished to sign up to a more robust position. Published a couple of days on, his letter attracted the signatures of several bishops and made clear that clergy were troubled by the amendment and want to see it modified. But it appears to be the view of a faction rather than officially sanctioned. Which returns me to my original search – the spark, I suppose, to a deeper question I have been subconsciously asking about the Church of England's role in public life in recent years. My hunt led me to the Church's public statement that the Archbishop of Canterbury is there to 'give a voice to people who are easily ignored by the powerful' and set out what Christianity has to say about the big questions we all face. When challenged by MPs on his political interventions, Archbishop Welby previously said in this magazine: 'It goes so far in history, basically back to Thomas Becket. Don't be political means be political, but not in a way I don't like.' I think Welby was missing the point. If the Church is going to move into the arena of elected politicians, it surely ought not to vacate the spiritual and moral space that gave cause for its privileged voice in the first place. I confess that, as a politician, I have watched with much irritation as the Church leadership has made its pronouncements on difficult government decisions with enthusiastic piety and moral surety. I am tempted to observe in return that there seems not to be equivalent enthusiasm to get stuck in on the tricky life and death stuff that it once regarded as central to its mission. I am sure much of that reticence derives from a genuine desire to empathise and refrain from casting judgement, but it is a choice nonetheless – one which calls into question the Church leadership's stated purpose to give voice to the voiceless. If whomever is appointed as the new Archbishop of Canterbury makes that same choice – intervening and emoting over tough political choices while ducking tougher moral ones – the Church may find even its supporters begin to question its privilege.
Glasgow Times
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Glasgow Times
Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions
The poster also said: 'On 4 July, Parliament will vote on a law that would: Remove ALL criminal penalties for abortion.' They added: 'Under MP Diana Johnson's amendment: No time limits. No gestational protections. No punishment for abortions at 7, 8, even 9 months.' Evaluation The proposal being discussed was not tabled by Diana Johnson, nor is there any evidence Parliament will be voting on it on July 4. It also does not remove all criminal penalties for abortion and maintains most of the limits that are currently in place. If the amendment is made into law it will still be illegal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy outside of the current rules – which among other things limit abortions after 24 weeks into a pregnancy – but her actions would be decriminalised, meaning she would not be punished. However doctors who perform abortions which are not permissible under current laws could still be punished. The facts Who has tabled the amendment? The poster initially said that the changes could come under an amendment from Diana Johnson MP. Ms Johnson did table an amendment to the last Government's criminal justice bill, however that bill – and therefore the amendment – was abandoned when the election was called. In a reply to another user, the original poster instead said they were referring to an amendment which 'has been tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi to the government's Crime & Policing Bill.' Ms Antoniazzi has indeed filed an amendment to the current crime and policing bill which is making its way through Parliament. The two amendments are very similar in their wording, although not identical. What does the amendment say? Ms Antoniazzi's amendment is called NC1 and reads: 'Removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion. For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' Ms Antoniazzi's explanatory note which accompanies the amendment states that the change would 'disapply existing criminal law' on abortion from 'women acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' This is at any point in the pregnancy, the note states. It adds: 'It would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including but not limited to the time limit, telemedicine, the grounds for abortion, or the requirement for two doctors' approval.' What does the current law on abortion say? The 1967 Abortion Act made abortion legal in some circumstances. In its current form the act allows an abortion if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner, and as long as the woman is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. The act also sets other restrictions on when an abortion can be legally carried out, including the need for sign-off by two registered medical practitioners. Outside of the parameters in which the 1967 act made abortion legal in certain circumstances, the practice is still governed by acts passed in 1929 and 1861 which can punish abortion with life imprisonment. When will the amendment be voted on? The Crime and Policing Bill, which this amendment has been attached to, has passed its first and second reading in the House of Commons. It is currently in the so-called report stage and a third reading in the Commons is due to happen 'on a date to be confirmed'. In a first reading the bill is presented to the Commons and not debated. The bill's general principles are debated at the second reading, then amendments come at committee and report stage. At the third reading MPs decide on whether to pass the bill. If they do it then goes onto the House of Lords. At the time of writing there was no sign of the crime and policing bill on the House of Commons schedule for July 4. In fact that day is a Friday and the House of Commons normally only sits on Mondays to Thursdays, sometimes sitting on Fridays to consider private member's bills. The crime and policing bill is not a private member's bill. Would this legalise abortion up to birth? No, the bill would decriminalise abortion up to birth for the pregnant woman, not legalise it. Decriminalising something means that while it is still illegal, breaking that law does not carry any penalty. The suggested amendment would only deal with 'a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'. Therefore the amendment does not change the current law on whether doctors can provide an abortion after 24 weeks. Other safeguards around legally provided abortions remain unchanged. Doctors and others who provided an abortion outside of the legally defined parameters could still be punished. It is just the pregnant woman who would escape punishment in such a scenario. Links Thread of posts on X (archived) UK Parliament – Dame Diana Johnson's amendment (archived) UK Parliament – Criminal Justice Bill, news (archived) Post referring to amendment (archived post and thread) House of Commons – Crime and Policing Bill, Amendment Paper (archived) Criminal Justice Bill – Cross-party amendment briefing (archived) – Abortion Act 1967 (archived) – Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 58 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 59 (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, details (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, news (archived) UK Parliament – Bill stages (archived) UK Parliament – What's on: Friday 4 July 2025 (archived) – Guide to Parliamentary Work (archived)
North Wales Chronicle
05-06-2025
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions
The poster also said: 'On 4 July, Parliament will vote on a law that would: Remove ALL criminal penalties for abortion.' They added: 'Under MP Diana Johnson's amendment: No time limits. No gestational protections. No punishment for abortions at 7, 8, even 9 months.' The proposal being discussed was not tabled by Diana Johnson, nor is there any evidence Parliament will be voting on it on July 4. It also does not remove all criminal penalties for abortion and maintains most of the limits that are currently in place. If the amendment is made into law it will still be illegal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy outside of the current rules – which among other things limit abortions after 24 weeks into a pregnancy – but her actions would be decriminalised, meaning she would not be punished. However doctors who perform abortions which are not permissible under current laws could still be punished. Who has tabled the amendment? The poster initially said that the changes could come under an amendment from Diana Johnson MP. Ms Johnson did table an amendment to the last Government's criminal justice bill, however that bill – and therefore the amendment – was abandoned when the election was called. In a reply to another user, the original poster instead said they were referring to an amendment which 'has been tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi to the government's Crime & Policing Bill.' Ms Antoniazzi has indeed filed an amendment to the current crime and policing bill which is making its way through Parliament. The two amendments are very similar in their wording, although not identical. What does the amendment say? Ms Antoniazzi's amendment is called NC1 and reads: 'Removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion. For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' Ms Antoniazzi's explanatory note which accompanies the amendment states that the change would 'disapply existing criminal law' on abortion from 'women acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' This is at any point in the pregnancy, the note states. It adds: 'It would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including but not limited to the time limit, telemedicine, the grounds for abortion, or the requirement for two doctors' approval.' What does the current law on abortion say? The 1967 Abortion Act made abortion legal in some circumstances. In its current form the act allows an abortion if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner, and as long as the woman is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. The act also sets other restrictions on when an abortion can be legally carried out, including the need for sign-off by two registered medical practitioners. Outside of the parameters in which the 1967 act made abortion legal in certain circumstances, the practice is still governed by acts passed in 1929 and 1861 which can punish abortion with life imprisonment. When will the amendment be voted on? The Crime and Policing Bill, which this amendment has been attached to, has passed its first and second reading in the House of Commons. It is currently in the so-called report stage and a third reading in the Commons is due to happen 'on a date to be confirmed'. In a first reading the bill is presented to the Commons and not debated. The bill's general principles are debated at the second reading, then amendments come at committee and report stage. At the third reading MPs decide on whether to pass the bill. If they do it then goes onto the House of Lords. At the time of writing there was no sign of the crime and policing bill on the House of Commons schedule for July 4. In fact that day is a Friday and the House of Commons normally only sits on Mondays to Thursdays, sometimes sitting on Fridays to consider private member's bills. The crime and policing bill is not a private member's bill. Would this legalise abortion up to birth? No, the bill would decriminalise abortion up to birth for the pregnant woman, not legalise it. Decriminalising something means that while it is still illegal, breaking that law does not carry any penalty. The suggested amendment would only deal with 'a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'. Therefore the amendment does not change the current law on whether doctors can provide an abortion after 24 weeks. Other safeguards around legally provided abortions remain unchanged. Doctors and others who provided an abortion outside of the legally defined parameters could still be punished. It is just the pregnant woman who would escape punishment in such a scenario. Thread of posts on X (archived) UK Parliament – Dame Diana Johnson's amendment (archived) UK Parliament – Criminal Justice Bill, news (archived) Post referring to amendment (archived post and thread) House of Commons – Crime and Policing Bill, Amendment Paper (archived) Criminal Justice Bill – Cross-party amendment briefing (archived) – Abortion Act 1967 (archived) – Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 58 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 59 (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, details (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, news (archived) UK Parliament – Bill stages (archived) UK Parliament – What's on: Friday 4 July 2025 (archived) – Guide to Parliamentary Work (archived)
Rhyl Journal
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions
The poster also said: 'On 4 July, Parliament will vote on a law that would: Remove ALL criminal penalties for abortion.' They added: 'Under MP Diana Johnson's amendment: No time limits. No gestational protections. No punishment for abortions at 7, 8, even 9 months.' The proposal being discussed was not tabled by Diana Johnson, nor is there any evidence Parliament will be voting on it on July 4. It also does not remove all criminal penalties for abortion and maintains most of the limits that are currently in place. If the amendment is made into law it will still be illegal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy outside of the current rules – which among other things limit abortions after 24 weeks into a pregnancy – but her actions would be decriminalised, meaning she would not be punished. However doctors who perform abortions which are not permissible under current laws could still be punished. Who has tabled the amendment? The poster initially said that the changes could come under an amendment from Diana Johnson MP. Ms Johnson did table an amendment to the last Government's criminal justice bill, however that bill – and therefore the amendment – was abandoned when the election was called. In a reply to another user, the original poster instead said they were referring to an amendment which 'has been tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi to the government's Crime & Policing Bill.' Ms Antoniazzi has indeed filed an amendment to the current crime and policing bill which is making its way through Parliament. The two amendments are very similar in their wording, although not identical. What does the amendment say? Ms Antoniazzi's amendment is called NC1 and reads: 'Removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion. For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' Ms Antoniazzi's explanatory note which accompanies the amendment states that the change would 'disapply existing criminal law' on abortion from 'women acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' This is at any point in the pregnancy, the note states. It adds: 'It would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including but not limited to the time limit, telemedicine, the grounds for abortion, or the requirement for two doctors' approval.' What does the current law on abortion say? The 1967 Abortion Act made abortion legal in some circumstances. In its current form the act allows an abortion if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner, and as long as the woman is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. The act also sets other restrictions on when an abortion can be legally carried out, including the need for sign-off by two registered medical practitioners. Outside of the parameters in which the 1967 act made abortion legal in certain circumstances, the practice is still governed by acts passed in 1929 and 1861 which can punish abortion with life imprisonment. When will the amendment be voted on? The Crime and Policing Bill, which this amendment has been attached to, has passed its first and second reading in the House of Commons. It is currently in the so-called report stage and a third reading in the Commons is due to happen 'on a date to be confirmed'. In a first reading the bill is presented to the Commons and not debated. The bill's general principles are debated at the second reading, then amendments come at committee and report stage. At the third reading MPs decide on whether to pass the bill. If they do it then goes onto the House of Lords. At the time of writing there was no sign of the crime and policing bill on the House of Commons schedule for July 4. In fact that day is a Friday and the House of Commons normally only sits on Mondays to Thursdays, sometimes sitting on Fridays to consider private member's bills. The crime and policing bill is not a private member's bill. Would this legalise abortion up to birth? No, the bill would decriminalise abortion up to birth for the pregnant woman, not legalise it. Decriminalising something means that while it is still illegal, breaking that law does not carry any penalty. The suggested amendment would only deal with 'a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'. Therefore the amendment does not change the current law on whether doctors can provide an abortion after 24 weeks. Other safeguards around legally provided abortions remain unchanged. Doctors and others who provided an abortion outside of the legally defined parameters could still be punished. It is just the pregnant woman who would escape punishment in such a scenario. Thread of posts on X (archived) UK Parliament – Dame Diana Johnson's amendment (archived) UK Parliament – Criminal Justice Bill, news (archived) Post referring to amendment (archived post and thread) House of Commons – Crime and Policing Bill, Amendment Paper (archived) Criminal Justice Bill – Cross-party amendment briefing (archived) – Abortion Act 1967 (archived) – Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 58 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 59 (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, details (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, news (archived) UK Parliament – Bill stages (archived) UK Parliament – What's on: Friday 4 July 2025 (archived) – Guide to Parliamentary Work (archived)
South Wales Guardian
05-06-2025
- Politics
- South Wales Guardian
Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions
The poster also said: 'On 4 July, Parliament will vote on a law that would: Remove ALL criminal penalties for abortion.' They added: 'Under MP Diana Johnson's amendment: No time limits. No gestational protections. No punishment for abortions at 7, 8, even 9 months.' The proposal being discussed was not tabled by Diana Johnson, nor is there any evidence Parliament will be voting on it on July 4. It also does not remove all criminal penalties for abortion and maintains most of the limits that are currently in place. If the amendment is made into law it will still be illegal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy outside of the current rules – which among other things limit abortions after 24 weeks into a pregnancy – but her actions would be decriminalised, meaning she would not be punished. However doctors who perform abortions which are not permissible under current laws could still be punished. Who has tabled the amendment? The poster initially said that the changes could come under an amendment from Diana Johnson MP. Ms Johnson did table an amendment to the last Government's criminal justice bill, however that bill – and therefore the amendment – was abandoned when the election was called. In a reply to another user, the original poster instead said they were referring to an amendment which 'has been tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi to the government's Crime & Policing Bill.' Ms Antoniazzi has indeed filed an amendment to the current crime and policing bill which is making its way through Parliament. The two amendments are very similar in their wording, although not identical. What does the amendment say? Ms Antoniazzi's amendment is called NC1 and reads: 'Removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion. For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' Ms Antoniazzi's explanatory note which accompanies the amendment states that the change would 'disapply existing criminal law' on abortion from 'women acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' This is at any point in the pregnancy, the note states. It adds: 'It would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including but not limited to the time limit, telemedicine, the grounds for abortion, or the requirement for two doctors' approval.' What does the current law on abortion say? The 1967 Abortion Act made abortion legal in some circumstances. In its current form the act allows an abortion if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner, and as long as the woman is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. The act also sets other restrictions on when an abortion can be legally carried out, including the need for sign-off by two registered medical practitioners. Outside of the parameters in which the 1967 act made abortion legal in certain circumstances, the practice is still governed by acts passed in 1929 and 1861 which can punish abortion with life imprisonment. When will the amendment be voted on? The Crime and Policing Bill, which this amendment has been attached to, has passed its first and second reading in the House of Commons. It is currently in the so-called report stage and a third reading in the Commons is due to happen 'on a date to be confirmed'. In a first reading the bill is presented to the Commons and not debated. The bill's general principles are debated at the second reading, then amendments come at committee and report stage. At the third reading MPs decide on whether to pass the bill. If they do it then goes onto the House of Lords. At the time of writing there was no sign of the crime and policing bill on the House of Commons schedule for July 4. In fact that day is a Friday and the House of Commons normally only sits on Mondays to Thursdays, sometimes sitting on Fridays to consider private member's bills. The crime and policing bill is not a private member's bill. Would this legalise abortion up to birth? No, the bill would decriminalise abortion up to birth for the pregnant woman, not legalise it. Decriminalising something means that while it is still illegal, breaking that law does not carry any penalty. The suggested amendment would only deal with 'a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'. Therefore the amendment does not change the current law on whether doctors can provide an abortion after 24 weeks. Other safeguards around legally provided abortions remain unchanged. Doctors and others who provided an abortion outside of the legally defined parameters could still be punished. It is just the pregnant woman who would escape punishment in such a scenario. Thread of posts on X (archived) UK Parliament – Dame Diana Johnson's amendment (archived) UK Parliament – Criminal Justice Bill, news (archived) Post referring to amendment (archived post and thread) House of Commons – Crime and Policing Bill, Amendment Paper (archived) Criminal Justice Bill – Cross-party amendment briefing (archived) – Abortion Act 1967 (archived) – Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 58 (archived) – Offences against the Person Act 1861, section 59 (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, details (archived) UK Parliament – Crime and Policing Bill, news (archived) UK Parliament – Bill stages (archived) UK Parliament – What's on: Friday 4 July 2025 (archived) – Guide to Parliamentary Work (archived)
