It is widely expected that the Protect Duty legislation will come into force later this year. These new laws will impose a responsibility on owners and operators of publicly accessible spaces and property, including schools, hospitals and other buildings, to provide protective measures and solutions to combat terrorist threats. Here, Paul Haggerty, HVM Business Development Manager, at Marshalls Landscape Protection explores what these changes mean and how local authorities will have to adapt.
Whilst it is set to come into effect later this year, there appears to be a lack of awareness of firstly, what the Protect Duty is, and secondly, how the changes will impact. There has been a number of high-profile terror attacks in the UK in recent years, in response to which, the Government launched a public consultation on the implementation of the ‘Protect Duty’ legislation in February 2021.
Also known as Martyn’s Law, the Protect Duty will seek to ensure that owners of publicly accessible areas implement the necessary protective measures to mitigate the threat of terrorist incidents appropriately. The Protect Duty consultation is particularly focussed on attacks similar to the tragic event that occurred at the Manchester Arena in 2017. Sadly, the name Martyn’s Law refers to Martyn Hett, one of the victims of the attack, which resulted in 22 lives lost as well as injuring hundreds more.
Public consultation
Currently there is no legislation in place that requires owners and operators of publicly accessible spaces to provide protection. However, since March 2017 in the UK, 27 terrorist plots have been foiled by the police and other security services. This alarming number is part of the reason that a public consultation was launched by the Government.
The consultation, which ran from February 2021 to July 2021, was open to the public but targeted venues, public buildings and other organisations particularly. It sought to address four key elements:
- Who (or where) should legislation apply to?
- What should the requirements be?
- How should compliance work?
- How should the Government best support and work with partners?
Initial suggestions on how best to defend against terrorist threats were also mentioned in the consultation document. These included seeking counter-terrorism advice and undertaking appropriate training, carrying out a vulnerability assessment of their location or venue and developing and implementing an effective plan to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities identified. As a complex issue, it was hoped that a strong response to the consultation would identify how best to approach the incoming changes.
In January 2022, the results of the Protect Duty consultation were released by the Government, highlighting the key themes identified. In total, 2,755 individuals or organisations responded to the consultation, answering a series of 58 questions that related to the four key elements.
Who (or where) should legislation apply to?
Importantly, the idea of introducing a Protect Duty was strongly supported in the consultation, with 70% of respondents agreeing that those responsible for public locations should take proportionate measures to protect the public from attacks. One key issue for many was identifying what qualified as a publicly accessible space. This was answered in the consultation, being defined as: “Any place to which the public or any section of the public has access, on payment or otherwise, as of right or by virtue of express or implied permission”. This includes public buildings, such as schools and hospitals.
In the consultation, when asked which specific places a Protect Duty should apply to, many suggested ‘all publicly accessible locations’ or ‘all locations in general’. In addition, the majority (58%) said there should be no exemptions to the Protect Duty. This would seem to align with the sentiment shared in the introductory section of the document that reiterated that attacks cannot be predicted and could occur at any location, making them difficult to prevent.
What should the requirements be?
Whilst the exact requirements of the legislation have not yet been finalised, some strong themes found in the responses gathered have emerged. A large amount of support was evident for ensuring that public building owners and operators carry out risk assessments to evaluate their vulnerabilities, and then act to mitigate these threats.
Additionally, strong views were expressed regarding accountability, with many responses agreeing that there should be clear paradigms for accountability set within the Duty. This mostly related to the need for clear roles and responsibilities within organisations.
Although these haven’t been confirmed, such a strong response would suggest that there is a higher likelihood that the above will be included in the legislation.
How should compliance work?
Questions put forward in this section of the consultation aimed to identify how those that responded felt that compliance to the Protect Duty should be monitored. The results displayed an almost even split for several questions in this category, including the use of an inspectorate. Just over 50% of respondents were in favour of this idea, believing that it would improve security culture and practices within organisations. Those that were not in favour of this system argued that it is a rather heavy-handed approach and could incur significant financial costs. A similarly even split was also seen in response to the proposed use of civil penalties to punish those that failed to comply.
How should the Government best support and work with partners?
The statement issued by the Government alongside the consultation response explained that the Home Office is working with the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) and Pool Reinsurance to create a new interactive online service. The platform, which is scheduled for launch later in the year, will provide a central hub for advice, guidance, e-learning resources and other relevant content. It is intended to provide support for all organisations in creating a safer environment, whether or not the Protect Duty applies to them.
What’s next for local authorities?
It is probable that the response to the Protect Duty consultation will shape the final legislation. For local authorities, being aware of how the new laws will look is crucial for planning ahead, as for many, new protective solutions will have to be installed and changes to current process will have to be made.
The first action for local authorities to carry out is to assess their current situation with a security professional. Analysing what systems are already in place and whether they are up to the required standard; identifying areas of vulnerability; and considering how a location is manned should all be part of these discussions.
It is important to note that the Protect Duty requirements will not be one-size-fits-all and will instead be proportionate, with factors such as location and venue capacity altering the required level of protection for a given site. Again, we would suggest consulting with a security specialist to determine an appropriate protective solution on a case-by-case basis.
Once the protective measures that need to be introduced have been identified, the next step is to begin researching the market for protective and landscape solutions and services. There are a vast number of products available, understanding how they work and what they offer will enable local authorities to make a more informed decision on how best to protect premises and most importantly, people.
