Nothing much is going to change as far as I can see.
How about they go to a house where there is some guy who has large amounts of misogynistic paraphernalia - is this just ignored and not recorded somewhere as intelligence.
There is no criminal offence of "Misogyny" with which someone can be charged and there is no legal basis for a crime to be "aggravated by Misogyny", ie. Misogyny is not a "Hate Crime" and has never been actionable as a "Non-Crime Hate Incident". Apart from a small number of Police Forces who have decided to add "Misogyny" to the "5 Monitored Strands" it would always have been ignored and will continue to be ignored.
Non-crime hate incidents review March 2026
March 2026 - College of Policing and National Police Chiefs Council
See Appendix 1 Evolution of national guidance on hate crimes and incidents for National Guidance on the Definitions of hate crimes and hate incidents:
https://www.npcc.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/media/downloads/our-work/coordination-committees/npcc-college-of-policing-non-crime-hate-incidents-review.pdf
Secondly, the Police have previously admitted that they never actually used NCHI recording for the purpose intended, ie. as informing intelligence about a possible rise in "hate" within a specific geographical area.
Note the words I have highlighted:
"Non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) were borne out of the landmark Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report, published in 1999. They were intended to help policing monitor incidents that are perceived by the complainant to be motivated by hate or hostility, but which are not crimes.
The intention was to gather information and intelligence to prevent crime, support investigations and safeguard the vulnerable. This remains as relevant today as it did 30 years ago. It is essential police retain the ability to monitor hate and hostility in our communities."
There is nothing in the Government News story indicating that the Police ever used NCHI's for their intended purpose:
Government response to non-crime hate incidents final report
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-response-to-non-crime-hate-incidents-final-report
Thirdly, NCHIs are not going to be scrapped, they are just changing the definition and introducing a "triage" process so that the Police do not, in most cases, treat a complainant as a "victim" based solely on the complainant's perception of an incident, eg. perceiving "misgendering" as motivated by "hate".
(Side Note: I say, "in most cases" because in rare cases the Police have refused to record an NCHI. I wish I could recall the example I read about because it was very telling that the Police suddenly decided that they had discretion in that case.)
The National Police Chief's Council's Review of Non-Crime Hate Incidents admits that the introduction of NCHIs pushed the Police to act beyond their remit.
The (current) National Standard for Incident Recording (NSIR) defines an ‘incident’ as:
- ‘a single distinct event or occurrence which disturbs an individual, group or community’s quality of life or causes them concern’.
This definition is broad in scope and is open to interpretation beyond the core purposes of policing – preventing and detecting crime, protecting life and property, and maintaining public order.
So they are changing the definition:
Proposed new definition of an incident
- ‘An incident is a single distinct event or occurrence which may be relevant to policing for preventing or solving crime, safeguarding individuals or communities or fulfilling other statutory policing purposes.’
They are also introducing a "triage" process to determine whether any police action is required.
However, even if the case is immediately closed as "No Further Action", it will still be logged against the Non-Crime perp's name and could still be disclosed in an Advanced DBS check:
"Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are background checks to help employers make safer recruitment decisions, particularly for roles involving children or vulnerable adults. An enhanced DBS check is the most detailed level of check and could include any relevant information held by police, including non-conviction information.
One of the key concerns raised about NCHIs is the possibility that employment rights could be affected by potential disclosure of non-conviction data through an enhanced DBS check. However, the release of non-conviction information on an enhanced criminal record certificate cannot happen unless a chief officer is satisfied that its release meets the threshold imposed by the Police Act 1997.
There is also statutory guidance to support chief officers in making such a decision.
Given the public concern expressed on this issue, the Home Office, as the responsible body, should consider whether any further guidance is required for chief constables when considering whether an additional disclosure should be made on an Enhanced DBS certificate.
Recommendation 13: The Home Office should assess if the current statutory guidance remains fit for purpose and if further support is needed to help chief officers in their DBS decision-making."
https://www.npcc.police.uk/our-work/work-of-npcc-committees/diversity-equality-and-inclusion-coordination-committee/review-of-non-crime-hate-incidents/
Also worth bearing in mind that about a third of NCHIs were recorded on the initiative of the Police without there being a complainant. That is, a Police Officer decided that someone, somewhere might perceive something as "hateful".
Perhaps that accounts for the mismatch between the ONS recording a decrease in public perception of incidence of "hate incidents" whilst the number of NCHIs recorded by Police increased?
It might also mean that the proposed triage process has less effect on the number of "new NCHIs" recorded than might be expected.