Features
UK Terrorism Bill In Response To Manchester Attack Criticized
The UK government published a terrorism draft bill, which is part of its response to the 2017 Manchester Arena attack. The bill, also referred to as Protection of Premises bill, has been criticized by the country’s trade association LIVE.
In general, the draft bill seems to disproportionally burden smaller businesses and events. It aims to regulate premises with a capacity of 100 or more people, and to apply more onerous regulations to premises with a capacity of 800-plus, including those not operating for profit.
The UK government’s own Home Affairs Committee, after scrutinizing the draft bill, stated, “we welcome the government’s overall intention behind the [bill], but have serious concerns about its proportionality, especially in relation to its impact on smaller premises, within the standard tier, where there is a lack of evidence that the risk of terrorist threat justifies the measures proposed or that the Bill will have any effect on reducing terrorist threats.”
See: Industry Reacts To Manchester
The committee also criticizes that “the overall objective of the Draft Bill remains opaque,” and is concerned “to learn that the draft bill would not have made a difference to the vast majority of the terrorist attacks that have happened in the UK in recent years. This suggests that the Draft Bill will not achieve some of its main objectives.”
What is more, the draft bill doesn’t address events at all where terrorism has been shown to pose a potential threat in the past, like Christmas or farmers markets.
Like all measures introduced in response to terrorism, this draft bill grants the regulating authority “extensive powers,” which the committee pointed out, as well. “There are no provisions setting out who the regulator will be, whether it will be independent or not, how it operates and how it should be accountable,” the committee’s report continues.
Report: Manchester Attack Might Have Been Prevented
The UK’s live entertainment trade body LIVE takes issue with the fact that the bill has been rushed through, and lacks “any thorough impact assessment.” It also lacked “consideration of the role of the existing licensing regime in preventing terrorism and protecting the public,” as well as proportionality, particularly for smaller venues.
LIVE CEO Jon Collins commented, “We welcome the Home Affairs Select Committee’s report which vindicates our members’ view that the draft Bill is both impractical and, through the excessive penalties it proposes, would create existential risk for live music venues, and could lead to events and festivals leaving the UK. LIVE’s members fully support the original purpose of the Bill to better protect audiences but, in its current form, it will fail to do this while also placing disproportionate burdens on venues of all sizes around the country. The Government must now urgently redesign the Bill to ensure it is workable, allows venues to continue to put on shows, and crucially delivers greater reassurance and safety for concertgoers.”