Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill — New Clause 1 — Review of the role of the regulator in oversight of public protection requirements — 9 Dec 2024 at 20:15
This new clause would require a report reviewing the role of the Security Industry Authority, including a comparative cost-benefit analysis of the regulatory functions being carried out by the Security Industry Authority with those functions being provided alternatively at a local authority level.
This new clause, together with Amendment 28, would require the Secretary of State to develop and implement a training plan in respect of qualifying premises and events before Parts 1 and 2 of the Act are commenced.
This amendment restricts the Secretary of State to lowering the daily penalties rate for non-compliance by regulation.
This amendment sets the floor for standard duty at 200 individuals.
This amendment sets the floor for enhanced duty premises and qualifying events at 799 individuals.
“on the day after the Secretary of State has laid before Parliament a report on developing and implementing training on public protection procedures contained within this Act.”This amendment is consequential on NC2.
“we are concerned about the administrative impact of the burden that will be imposed on smaller businesses, and we are concerned about the costs.”
“it is crucial to address the proportionality of the proposed measures, within all settings. We must ensure that the balance between heightened security and practical implementation is carefully considered.”
“it is reasonable to expect that from time to time 200 or more individuals may be present”.
“If a venue operator does not know how to evacuate their venue they should not be running that venue and if training can be provided to help make that evacuation safer then venues should grasp it with both hands.”
“I just think that we cannot talk ourselves into a sort of thing where it is all too big a burden. I can tell you from experience: a terrorist attack is a massive burden on a city and what it does challenges everybody at every level-and that is ongoing. Like Figen said, Manchester will never be the same again after what happened. It has changed us but it has strengthened us and made us more united, and as I say, I do not want any other city to go through that.”––[Official Report, Terrorism (Protection of Premises Public Bill Committee, 29 October 2024; c. 16, Q11.]
“for evacuating individuals from the premises”.
“followed by individuals working on the premises or at the event if there is reason to suspect that an act of terrorism is occurring, or is about to occur, on the premises”.
“To suffer such a horrendous loss and somehow find the strength to fight for changes…is heroic.”-[Official Report, 14 October 2024; Vol. 754, c. 624.]
Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please
consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.
Party Summary
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
| Party | Majority (No) | Minority (Aye) | Both | Turnout |
| Con | 0 | 81 (+2 tell) | 0 | 68.6% |
| DUP | 0 | 3 | 0 | 60.0% |
| Independent | 4 | 1 | 0 | 35.7% |
| Lab | 336 (+2 tell) | 0 | 0 | 83.9% |
| LDem | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% |
| Reform UK | 0 | 1 | 0 | 20.0% |
| Traditional Unionist Voice | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| UUP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 340 | 88 | 0 | 69.5% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by party
MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote | |
| no rebellions | ||||