Venues cannot expect the highest levels of security and protection if they do not recognise that they need to be paid sufficiently, says Steve McMenemy, Managing Director of Redline Assured Security.

As the implementation of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill approaches, it is worth considering how the new legislation, also known as Martyn’s Law, will address the varying standards of security currently being delivered across the industry.  

We all attend concert venues, visitor attractions and a multitude of other locations that employ frontline security staff to protect visitors, staff and premises from coming to harm, but the standard of screening, including X-ray, bag and body search, is so varied, and, in many cases, ineffective, leaving the location and those inside it vulnerable to an attack.  

Whilst the measures that will be introduced as a result of Martyn’s Law are very welcome, much needed and a significant step in the right direction, the implementation of new policies, procedures and contingency plans will not prevent another terrorist attack if the weakest link remains the lack of investment in our frontline security staff.  

Indeed, despite all the fantastic work to get Martyn’s Law across the line, there appears, on the surface, to have been little change since the Manchester Arena attack that demonstrates any significant investment in the training standards and quality assurance of frontline security staff to a level that can provide measurable, statistical data that shows the standard is improving, the risk is reducing and that all frontline security staff are capable of deterring and preventing the next attack.  

A new standard 

The new legislation is long overdue, but it needs to be broader and consider the introduction of a new, independent and more robust national quality assurance programme that provides governance through more frequent inspections, audits and testing of security companies employing frontline screening staff.  

The Security Industry Authority (SIA) currently set the quality assurance standard, but how often is it truly measured to ensure training and operational standards remain fit for purpose and are being implemented robustly and repeatedly by all frontline security staff?

In addition, as owners of security companies, are you comfortable that your teams are carrying out their duties competently and effectively? How often do you turn over the stones and look for yourself? What checks are in place to audit your own procedures and test operational staff to ensure the correct standards are being delivered each and every time? Food for thought.  

The SIA and the wider security industry should also consider the benefits of introducing an independent national quality assurance covert testing programme, designed and delivered to a national standard, documented within a Code of Practice that all security companies providing operational staff are asked to sign up and adhere to.

Taking this approach will provide the SIA and UK security companies with a continuous measurement of the standard of screening being applied by operational security staff.

In turn, this will help to drive improvement across the industry as well as assisting the SIA to filter out those companies who continuously fail to adhere to an acceptable standard and are potentially putting their clients at risk as well as giving the industry a bad reputation.    

Independent testing programmes 

Some independent covert testing programmes have already been implemented by a few large UK venues, mainly due to security vendors not providing their own evidence of internal quality assurance to the client, but also in recognition that the threat is ever present and that more importance needs to be placed on testing the capability of the staff being employed to protect those entering their venue.  

This is a positive step in the right direction, and I applaud those security managers for implementing their own quality assurance covert testing programmes, but it’s not enough.

There needs to be some serious thought and discussion given to the development and implementation of a national quality assurance covert testing strategy that includes every venue and security vendor who is employed to conduct screening duties and protect premises.    

But, how are these initiatives supposed to be funded? Security companies are frequently in a race to the bottom when competing for business, but in that race lies one of the root causes of the current dilemma: security of the standard needed to reduce risk and improve public safety costs.

The second aspect is that the cost of quality assurance is tiny in comparison to that of security equipment, staff and the impact of failing to prevent an attack.  

Monthly covert testing programmes can cost as little as £1000 to have independent yet robust and objective results that underpin a continual improvement cycle and give an organisation the assurance that their security provisions are fit for purpose.

Without this, it’s largely a guessing game as to how it will perform when attacked. Regardless of the solution, it will be different in scale, complexity and cost for each type of organisation, but the common theme is that there needs to be a reality check for venues who employ security, the security vendors providing the staff, and the government and industry bodies who are backing the implementation of Martyn’s Law.   

Increased budget 

Venues cannot expect the highest levels of security and protection or to hold security vendors accountable if they don’t recognise that they need to be paid sufficiently enough to ensure they can invest in the quality of their frontline security staff, not only in terms of pay and conditions, but the levels of training and mentoring they need to be capable of detecting suspicious behaviour, operate screening equipment correctly, and have the competency to accurately detect and identify prohibited articles.    

In turn, the government needs to recognise, as they have done with the recent increase to the defence budget, that additional funding is needed to support the Home Office, the SIA and the security industry improve the standard and capability of our frontline security staff and ultimately help to protect UK law-abiding citizens from acts of terrorism.   

At Redline Assured Security, we have been fortunate over the last 19 years to have operated in heavily regulated sectors such as aviation, rail and maritime as well as many UK Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) sites.

This has allowed us to develop and deliver effective quality assurance programmes and safe testing regimes, giving us extensive knowledge and firsthand experience of the benefits they provide to the security industry.    

For more information, visit our website at www.trustredline.co.uk.