When the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act, popularly known as Martyn’s Law, received royal assent in April this year, it signalled a significant shift in how public venues across the UK, including schools, should consider and act on terrorism risk.
Named in memory of Martyn Hett, one of the victims of the 2017 Manchester Arena attack, the legislation aims to embed proportionate security planning into everyday practice, saving lives without overwhelming establishments.
For schools, the law mandates effective plans to mitigate the impact of an attack should one occur.
With a two-year implementation window before the law becomes enforceable, school leaders now have the opportunity to ensure compliance, embedding key requirements into existing safeguarding systems and tailoring them to the unique nature of school environments.
Beyond safeguarding
Many schools already have well‑developed safeguarding, emergency and health‑and‑safety strategies in place. Martyn’s Law deliberately builds on these with a targeted focus on deliberate acts of violence rather than accidental harm.
The requirements come in a tiered form. Most schools will fall into the standard tier (venues with a capacity of over 100), while larger sites with public-facing spaces such as theatres, sports halls or assembly venues, would fall under the “enhanced” tier (capacity of over 800).
At its core, the law requires institutions to assess the threat of terrorism to their premises and activities, implement proportionate protective measures in response to this assessment, and ensure staff receive appropriate terrorism awareness training.
For enhanced-tier venues, further duties include maintaining a detailed security plan, appointing a designated senior officer and liaising regularly with emergency services and local authorities.
Practical steps
Although final statutory guidance has yet to be published, there’s plenty schools can do now to get ahead.
First, map out when and how your premises are open to the public. For most secondary schools, this will include concerts, open evenings and sports events. For larger academies or colleges, it may also cover significant lettings or performances drawing large audiences.
Some settings may even operate on-site bars during events or have licensed areas, which can add a layer of complexity to crowd management and security planning. Even for smaller primaries, occasional public events could bring them within scope.
Next, establishments need to consider appointing a senior staff member, often a site or business manager, to oversee compliance. The designated individual should work closely with other selected safeguarding leads and health‑and‑safety coordinators to ensure planning complements rather than duplicates existing procedures.
Schools need to also begin a basic risk and vulnerability assessment. There should be no need for costly consultancy as free resources are available, such as the ACT Awareness e‑learning module from Counter Terrorism Policing.
The aim here is to document potential vulnerabilities (for instance, uncontrolled visitor access, crowded entrances or congregation areas such as assembly halls or playgrounds) and consider sensible measures (such as improved signage, extra staff supervision, CCTV or temporary bag checks at high‑profile events).
Additionally, emergency procedures need revisiting. Are your lockdown and evacuation plans suitable for a hostile threat, and do staff and pupils know how to react? Even relatively small adjustments, such as clarifying communication protocols or designating safe areas can help mitigate the most severe consequences.
Finally, probably the most apparent duty is ensuring staff are effectively trained to implement these plans. Schools will need to look ahead so that all staff, particularly those responsible for premises or public events, have the skill and confidence to identify suspicious activity and respond appropriately.
The government is expected to provide free training materials, making this a manageable addition to CPD programmes or INSET days.
Balancing security with school ethos
Understandably, some school leaders worry that talking openly about terrorism might cause anxiety among pupils or staff, or risk making schools feel less welcoming.
However, Martyn’s Law is designed to be proportionate. It’s not about metal detectors at every door but about ensuring that if something did happen, staff and pupils would know what to do, just as they do for fires or medical emergencies.
Concerns around cost and workload are also valid. One practical approach is collaboration: schools within trusts, federations or local clusters could share resources, carry out joint risk assessments and arrange group training sessions to spread effort and cost.
Communication is another piece of the puzzle. Engaging governors, parents and local communities early helps build trust and ensures everyone understands the purpose and mechanisms: keeping children, staff and visitors safe without fundamentally changing what makes a school feel like a school.
Turning duty into opportunity
At its heart, Martyn’s Law is about preparedness, not fear. For school leaders and premises managers, the next two years provide a window to embed these changes gradually, sensibly and sustainably.
Starting early allows schools to shape policies around their own culture and circumstances, rather than rushing to comply. It also reinforces the message that while we cannot always prevent every threat, we can prepare, confidently, calmly and proportionately.
By doing so, schools can meet their new legal duties in a way that supports, rather than distracts from their core mission of creating safe, supportive places for young people to learn, grow and thrive.
Your thoughts