How will protect duty affect public premises?

Many property management professionals are aware of the draft Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill that will place a duty on any person responsible for qualifying public premises or events to take certain steps to enhance security and minimise the threat of terrorism at publicly accessible locations. 

Some readers will also have taken part in the initial consultations on the draft in February 2021, which received 2,755 individual and organisational responses. These helped establish a baseline for what the legislation should include, and which kinds of premises it should cover. 

But organisations are still closely monitoring the progress of the bill – also known as Martyn's Law – named after Martyn Hett, a victim of the 2017 Manchester Arena bomb – so they can prepare to comply with any potential requirements arising from future legislation. 

London Bridge was the focal point of attack again in 2019 and there was also a terror attack at the Manchester Arndale Centre. In addition, in 2020 a terror attack took place in Forbury Gardens, Reading. These examples all show the importance of protecting publicly accessible locations. 

All of these attacks took place after the Manchester Arena bombings. Figen Murray, whose son Martyn Hett was killed in that attack, has been calling for the introduction of Martyn's Law after realising that more was needed to be done to ensure the protection of the public.

Additional support for the legislation was provided by the chair of the Manchester Arena Inquiry, Sir John Saunders, who in volume one of his report criticised the lack of a duty to identify and mitigate the risk of terrorism and provide adequate protection to the public. 

Any premises in which qualifying activities take place would be covered by the legislation, including:

• entertainment and leisure venues
• retail, food and drink outlets
• museums and galleries
• sports grounds
• public areas of local and central government buildings
• visitor attractions
• temporary events
• places of worship
• healthcare facilities
• education premises.

Any qualifying activities – including temporary events – must have a defined boundary for the relevant premises, which allows the capacity to be determined. 

Premises and events in both tiers will be required to register with a regulator; though at the time of writing the identity of this regulator has yet to be confirmed.

As currently proposed, smaller premises within larger properties will have to adhere to the relevant legislative requirements. 

For instance, a shopping centre with a capacity of more than 800 would count as an enhanced premises, but if it also contained a cinema with a capacity of 800-plus and a large store with a capacity of more than 100, they would also have to adhere to the enhanced- and standard-tier requirements, respectively. 

The size of these financial penalties would depend on the tier of the premises or event in question:

• standard tier: maximum of £10,000
• enhanced tier: potentially a maximum of up to £18m or 5% of the person's qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is the greater. 

The report also agreed with the Regulatory Policy Committee's rating of the bill as not being fit for purpose.

With this in mind, the legislation is likely to be amended significantly as it continues its passage through Parliament. Assuming it does so, the bill is likely to be enacted in 2025, after which there should be a grace period to enable all premises to ensure they are compliant. 

However, the property management sector – and especially those firms with large portfolios of qualifying premises – will have to act quickly to do so. 

While employers should not take any major steps before the final provisions of any new legislation are clear, it will be sensible for firms to be sure that they currently have appropriate security measures in place with the ability to adopt any new required measures as and when applicable.