171.Subsections (2) and (3) change the test in section 25 of the PVG Act so that it more explicitly reflects the filtering nature of the provision, such that an application for removal will only be competent if Ministers are satisfied that there has been a change in circumstances since the applicant was listed or last made an application for removal from the list which is relevant to the question of their suitability to carry out a regulated role.
172.Subsection (4) repeals references to a quashed conviction in 25(5) and 25(6) of the PVG Act. The repeal of these subsections does not necessarily mean that a quashed conviction will no longer be treated as a relevant change of circumstances. It may still be a relevant change in circumstances leading to a competent application for determination under section 26 of the PVG Act, but it will not always be relevant. This resolves any ambiguity for individuals who may think that a conviction being quashed will automatically lead to someone’s removal from the list. This is not the case, since there are different standards of proof for a criminal finding of guilt (beyond reasonable doubt) and the civil standard for listing decisions (balance of probabilities).