UK to repeal ‘archaic' 200-year-old rough sleeping law
The government will repeal the 200-year-old Vagrancy Act by the spring of next year, which criminalised rough sleeping.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner stated that Labour is ending 'nearly two centuries of injustice' towards vulnerable people.
Homeless charities have long advocated for the repeal of the 'archaic' law, arguing that criminalising the homeless is not the solution and that support is needed instead.
New measures will be introduced through amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill to ensure police have the necessary powers, including offences for facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with intent to commit a crime.
Homelessness charities such as Crisis and St Mungo's have praised the repeal, while Centrepoint cautioned against unintended consequences from the proposed amendments.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
20 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Inspector's report into Chinese ‘mega-embassy' with ministers for final decision
Communities minister Baroness Taylor of Stevenage said a Government determination on the application would be made on or before September 9. Until then, neither the inspector's report nor its recommendation would be made public. The plans by Beijing for a super-embassy on the historic former site of the Royal Mint near the capital's financial district have sparked security concerns. Worries stem from the close proximity of the extensive development to critical data centres and communication cables. The contentious scheme comes against the backdrop of ongoing disquiet over Chinese interference in the UK, with allegations of spies infiltrating the establishment and secret police stations being used to intimidate dissidents in Britain. Unease has also previously been raised over ministerial involvement in progressing the plans, after the Metropolitan Police dropped their opposition. The final decision on the application now rests with Communities Secretary Angela Rayner (PA/Gareth Fuller) The embassy development was 'called in', which means Communities Secretary Angela Rayner, who is also Deputy Prime Minister, will make the final decision taking into account the inspector's findings. Updating peers at Westminster, Lady Taylor said: 'The inspector's report was received on June 10 by the department. 'Parties have been notified that a decision will be made on or before September 9 2025. 'As the report has just been received, we have not yet begun to assess the case. 'The inspector's report will form part of the final decision and will be released alongside it. 'Until that point, neither the recommendation nor the report will be made public.' She added: 'Because we now have the report, we will be considering it, it wouldn't be helpful to comment on any specific security issue raised on the application while it's under active consideration by the department.' The minister said the inspector's evidence-based recommendation would take into account a wide variety of material planning matters, which 'may include safety and national security'. Pressed over previous warnings by the head of MI5 over the 'epic scale' of Chinese espionage in the UK, Lady Taylor said: 'National security is, of course, the first duty of government, more generally. 'With regards to the specifics of the case, the inspector's report will consider the application against all of the national issues, local issues and regional issues, according to planning policy, and safety and national security will be taken into consideration, to make sure that we have considered fully all of the issues that may relate to this planning application.' She added: 'It's difficult to answer general questions about the relationship with China and talk about that in the same space as a planning decision, which has to be taken according to a fixed process. 'But please be assured that national security is (something) we very strongly consider to be our first duty.' Independent crossbencher Lord Alton of Liverpool, who has been banned by Beijing over his criticism of its human rights record, including its treatment of the Uighur Muslim minority, said: 'It's hard to imagine that if in 1980 the former Soviet Union had asked for a prime site for a new mega-embassy that we in Parliament would have agreed at that time.' Responding, Lady Taylor said: 'The Government stands firm on human rights, including against China's repression of the people of Xinjiang and Tibet.' On the plans for the embassy, she added: 'All material planning considerations will be taken into account in determining the case.'
The Sun
25 minutes ago
- The Sun
Where is The Orkney Assassin Michael Ross now?
THE Orkney Assassin, Michael Ross, was just 15 years old when he murdered waiter Shamsuddin Mahmood. On June 2 1994, Ross shot the waiter while he served customers in an Indian restaurant in Orkney, an island located off the northern coast of Scotland. Where is Michael Ross now? Michael Ross, born on 28 August 1978, was found guilty of the murder in 2008 and is serving a life sentence in HMP Shotts in Lanarkshire, with a minimum of 25 years. Ross was originally questioned by police six months after the murder of the 26-year-old waiter, but prosecutors ruled there was not enough evidence to charge the teenager. In the following summer, Ross left the island of Orkney, where he was born, and 17 joined the Scottish regiment. From there, he progressed through the ranks and became a decorated Black Watch sniper after serving a tour of duty in Iraq. But on June 20 2008, he was brought to justice in the High Court in Glasgow. During his guilty verdict, Ross, dramatically tried to flee by jumping out of the dock and knocking over the security guard. Now 47 years old, Ross has tried to escape HMP Shotts, one of Scotland's highest security prisons, three times, including an attempt to scale the fence in 2018. As a result, he was sentenced to two years in prison to run alongside his life term of which he has served 17 years so far. What happened to Shamsuddin Mahmood? The murder of Shamsuddin Mahmood took place on June 2, 1994 when he was fatally shot after a man wearing a balaclava entered Mumataz Restaurant in Kirkwall at around 7.10pm and exited the premises shortly after. Shamsuddin had arrived in Orkney only six weeks before and had plans to return to Bangladesh to marry his fiancée. Shamsuddin's murder was the first to take place on the island in 25 years and during the original investigation, 2,736 statements were taken. Ross' mother Moira, recounted the time Michael came home from the police station when he was 16 years old. She went upstairs and asked whether he had shot Shamsuddin six months before, which he denied. During the investigation, Edmund Ross' career as a police officer ended after he lied about the fact that he owned identical bullets to those used in the murder weapon. Edmund Ross was subsequently jailed for four years in 1997 for perverting the course of justice. It is reported that Michael Ross' earliest possible release is in 2035. How to watch The Orkney Assassin: Murder In The Isles Amazon Prime Video has released a special titled The Orkney Assassin: Murder In The Isles, providing insight from law enforcement officers, eyewitnesses, journalists, and also interviews with Ross' parents, who maintain his innocence. The first episode aired on Sunday, June 8 2025.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Parents ‘abandoned' teenager in Ghana over fears he would become a gangster in Britain
Parents 'abandoned' a teenage boy in Ghana over fears he would become a gangster if he remained in Britain, a court has heard. The boy, who cannot be identified, started a family court case after his parents enrolled him at a boarding school in the west African country before leaving him abroad in March 2024. The parents were said to be concerned that the teenager was at risk of engaging in criminal activity or being killed due to knife crime. At a previous hearing, he said he had been 'tricked' and his lawyers asked a judge to order that he be brought back to the UK, having lived in the country since birth. In a decision in February, High Court judge Mr Justice Hayden did not make the order, finding the teenager 'is at real risk of suffering greater harm in returning to the UK than if he were to remain in Ghana'. The teenager is now bringing a challenge over the decision at the Court of Appeal in London, which his parents oppose. 'Feels that he is a British boy' At a hearing on Thursday, Deirdre Fottrell KC, the boy's barrister, said that it was his 'steadfast and firm wish' for the appeal judges to order his return to the UK. She said: 'It is alienating for him and he feels that he is a British boy... he never envisaged the situation that he would be living away from his family in another country and away from all that is familiar to him.' Ms Fottrell said the boy is 'highly distressed' about the situation and feels 'abandoned' by his family. She continued: 'He really is quite desperate to return... to return to his family, to return to his social life and the structure in which he was living, but also to return to the UK.' In written submissions, the barrister said the previous judge failed to give 'due weight' to the boy's feelings and autonomy and also 'erroneously limited' his role in reviewing whether the decision to move the boy to Ghana was within the scope of parental responsibility. Ms Fottrell added: 'In the instant case Mr Justice Hayden discounted [the boy's] wishes and feelings, assuming that there was a clear and tangible threat to his welfare. 'He discounted evidence that any threat was not capable of being ameliorated by other safeguards or protective measures.' Rebecca Foulkes, for the parents, said they 'found themselves in a wholly invidious position in March when they made the decision which they made'. The barrister said in written submissions that the previous judge's decision was 'well reasoned' and 'fell well within the parameters of reasonable decisions open to him'. Worrying conversations on Snapchat The High Court previously heard that the parents' concerns about their son had been growing before the decision to take him out of the UK. These concerns included poor school attendance, being aggressive, susceptibility to being groomed, an allegation of stealing phones and worrying conversations on Snapchat, a social media channel. In his ruling, Mr Justice Hayden said he accepted that the teenager was involved in criminal activity and was at least 'on the periphery' of gang culture. Ms Foulkes said in her written submissions on Thursday: 'The conclusion reached, on the facts of this case, cannot be said to be anything other than a sound welfare decision.' The barrister later said that while the boy's wishes and feelings are a 'central aspect' of the decision over what is in his best interest, 'ultimately, the court determined that his best interests required that his views should not prevail'. During the previous proceedings, the boy said he would rather be in foster care in the UK than remain in his current situation. Ms Foulkes said the previous judge was entitled to conclude that the teenager 'had little understanding of what entering the care system truly involves' and that he was 'likely to continue to reject the authority of his parents, school and other adults, and his acting out and risk-taking behaviours were highly likely to increase' if he were placed in care. The hearing before Sir Andrew McFarlane, Lord Justice Baker and Lord Justice Arnold is due to conclude on Thursday.
