The Home Office has published the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill which will be debated in the Commons on 14 October. A draft version of the Bill produced under the previous administration had been scrutinised by the Home Affairs Select Committee in 2023.

The new bill, mentioned in the King’s Speech in July, is a policy response to the bombing of the Manchester Arena in 2017 and in which 22 people were killed. The new version is substantially similar to the draft proposals put forward under the last government, but a number of important changes have been made.

First, and among the most important, is that the objective of the new statutory duty is now defined. It is that those responsible for publicly accessible premises and events in scope “must, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure that appropriate public protection procedures are in place to…reduce the risk of physical harm being caused to individuals if an act of terrorism were to occur on the premises, at the event or in the immediate vicinity”.

Second is that the two tiers of the new duty have been retained, albeit that the threshold for the “standard tier” has been increased from 100 to 200 people. The “enhanced tier” threshold remains the same, at 800 people (which will also apply to capacity at events). Complying with the duty will, as set out above and in either tier, be subject to the well-known concept of “reasonably practicability”. These changes stem from the concerns about the cost and impact of compliance expressed by stakeholders in relation to community events and smaller premises. The Home Office press release notably refers to “making sure undue burdens are not placed on small businesses.” 

A further area of clarity is that the new Bill designates the Security Industry Association (SIA) as the relevant regulator - the earlier version did not specify which public body would be the regulator - and will give the SIA relevant powers in that respect, including to conduct inspections and to issue civil sanctions, compliance notices and penalties. The previous maximum figures for penalties are retained, these being £10,000 in the standard tier and £18 million or 5% of worldwide revenue in the enhanced tier.

Regardless of capacity, places of worship and primary and secondary schools will be subject to the standard tier. Universities and other higher education institutions will be subject to the appropriate tier according to capacity.

Failure to comply with the new statutory duty will not, of itself, give rise to civil liability, although this “does not affect any right of action which exists apart [from the Bill]”.

A good deal of the necessary detail on many aspects of the new duty will be fleshed out in regulations and guidance to be issued by the Secretary of State after the Bill has been passed by Parliament. The impact assessment (IA) published alongside the Bill notes that “The majority of the cost of the policy falls to businesses.” The IA also suggests that around 180,000 premises nationally - the bill applies to all four parts of the UK - are in scope and that annual compliance costs could be of the order of £300 in the standard tier and £5,000 in the enhanced tier.

In summary, the new duty will affect occupiers of premises in scope across nearly all sectors of the economy. Although framing the duty as being required to take “reasonably practicable” measures to protect the public is to be welcomed, it should nevertheless be recognised that within the enhanced tier (ie for larger premises and events, and for business responsible for multiple premises or sites) meeting the “reasonably practicable” test is likely to involve a much more bespoke approach to understanding and assessing risks, and to documenting plans and steps to be taken in mitigation, than would be the case in the standard tier of the duty.

That said, most responsible businesses will already be addressing aspects of the new duty in existing disciplines such as building / fire safety, disaster planning, event management & licensing, and under general health and safety laws. The regime to be implemented under ‘Martyn’s law’ is likely to require an holistic approach to assessing risks of terrorist attacks, bringing those and other areas together to ensure compliance.