![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/netpol.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/49f21191-e2ef-425a-8e9d-62579cd062e3.jpg?resize=1000%2C532&ssl=1\")
<\/a>On Monday, the House of Lords voted on the parts of the government\u2019s controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill relating to protest. The Lords have rejected<\/a> some of the draconian measures in the Bill, but left others intact. However, the government has suffered some serious defeats as the Lords struck down many of their proposals, and on Twitter<\/a>, an outraged Home Secretary Priti Patel accused the Lords of siding with \u201cthugs and vandals\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n While these changes represent a limited victory, Netpol are among the many who are still calling for the Bill to be scrapped in its entirety. While the Lords votes seek to soften the sharpest edges of the Bill, there is still the chance for the Bill to be amended<\/a> against before it becomes an Act and many of the most racist features of the Bill are still in place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These include moves to further criminalise Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities<\/a>, making it possible to seize people\u2019s homes and imprison them, and proposals for the new \u2018Serious Violence Reduction Orders\u2019 (SVROs)<\/a> which would give police additional powers to harass Black men and which have only been amended<\/a>, not removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still included too are proposed changes to law around public nuisance which would criminalise causing \u201cserious annoyance\u201d, and a change to the Public Order Act which would make it easier to convict people of a criminal offence if they don\u2019t comply with conditions imposed on demonstrations by the police. The current legislation meant that in order to convict you, the police had to prove that you knew about these conditions \u2013 new changes mean that you can commit a criminal offence if you don\u2019t comply with restrictions you merely \u201cought to have known\u201d about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government response to the Lords votes has been an indication of how they see this Bill has an important element of the Conservatives\u2019 desire to fight a culture war that means any protest involving civil disobedience or direct action (no matter how peaceful) is in Priti Patel\u2019s words the work of \u201cvandals and thugs\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It therefore seems likely ministers will fight tooth and nail to give senior police officers the sweeping anti-protest powers they have lobbied for. Anyone doubting the government intends to portray the exercise of freedom of assembly as some kind of liberal frivolity should note this statement<\/a> by Baroness Williams: \u201cThe arguments deployed here tonight are about the middle classes trying to stop working people going to work.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In an apparent reference to the coronavirus pandemic \u2013 an issue that ministers are desperate to push criticism onto others at the moment \u2013 Conservative Party Chair Oliver Dowden went further and claimed<\/a> opponents of the Bill in the House of Lords \u201cvoted to make it to harder for the British people to get on with their lives\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ll be following and reporting on the final stages of the Bill as it continues its way through Parliament, and you can find our two-part explainer of the\u00a0Policing Bill<\/a>\u00a0and the\u00a0government amendments<\/a>\u00a0to it on our blog.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHere are the major changes to the Bill from the Lords vote:<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Stoking a culture war<\/h4>\n\n\n\n