Contractor buildings and personnel located within the Defence Estate are covered by the security arrangements of the site at which they are situated. Depending on the outputs of the site this may include the use of military support to provide the security arrangements. For those contractor buildings and personnel not based on the Defence Estate, the Minstry of Defence (MOD) do not provide military support. Defence has well established mandated security policies and processes to ensure Defence Industry security controls and measures meet with MODs risk appetite.

Estimates for the capacity of venues are based on a floorspace factor calculation (where no known capacity is available), drawing from ordnance survey data. The breakdown is:

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, Government made changes to the Bill removing the smallest premises from scope and reducing the number of venues in the standard tier from approximately 278,900 to an estimated 154,600.

In addition, responsible persons will now be able to assess the number of people that may reasonably be expected to be present. This is considered a fairer basis to reflect actual usage of venues.

When considering the appropriate threshold, Government’s concern is to ensure venues where a sizable amount of people gather are in scope, ensuring those responsible are required to take proportionate and reasonable action to mitigate the impacts of a terrorist attack. We are confident that, because of the changes detailed, the Bill strikes an appropriate balance between protecting the public and preventing undue burden on organisations in scope.

The Bill has provided for events to be in scope where it is considered that there is an appropriate level of control and that mitigating measures for protective security and preparedness can reasonably be put in place.

For an event to be in scope of the bill, it must:

• take place in a building, on other land or at a combination of the two (unless the location already falls within the enhanced tier);
• be accessible to members of the public;
• have individuals in place at the event to take payment from members of the public or to check their tickets or passes; and
• be reasonably expected to be attended by 800 or more individuals at some point during the event.

Outdoor events that satisfy the above criteria will fall within scope of the Bill. Well established processes already exist to help those responsible for large open events to consider threats and develop appropriate protection and preparedness arrangements. This includes processes, led by the police, to consider security for large open events and, where appropriate, the deployment of appropriate measures and procedures working with event organisers.

The regulator function of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill will be delivered as a new function of the Security Industry Authority and will be funded by the Home Office.

The Security Industry Authority has an existing licence fee-funded arrangement that will not be used to deliver its functions under this Bill.

Work is ongoing to design the new regulatory regime and to finalise costs.

An event must satisfy several criteria to be in scope of the Bill. One of these criteria is that the event must have employees, or other individuals involved in the event, checking that attendees have paid to attend the event, have an invitation granting access, or have a pass that grants access (which might include a free ticket).

Whilst this provision applies to paid-for events, this provision will also encompass free events, if there is a check that attendees satisfy a condition of entry as specified above.

We consider the ‘express permission’ requirement provides an appropriate basis to capture events where there is the resource and control to consider and take forward security requirements.

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

The Government intends to launch a public consultation on the proposed amendments to the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill’s Standard Tier. Premises that fall within the Standard Tier are smaller, with a capacity of 100 to 799 e.g. many retail stores, bars, restaurants, theatres and village halls.

The Government is launching this consultation to ensure the Bill strikes the right balance between protecting the public and avoiding undue burdens on smaller premises. The consultation will also provide those impacted by the Bill with an opportunity to offer in-depth views on the Standard Tier.

We intend to launch the consultation shortly and it will be live for 6 weeks. I will write to the Honourable Member and Parliament once the consultation is live.

It is wonderful to see such a strong contingent from Lancashire in the Gallery. Skelmersdale and Ormskirk will be proud of their new MP, I am sure.

Developers are lining up to sign our contract to remediate approximately 1,500 buildings. Some 95% of those buildings with the most dangerous Grenfell-style cladding have already been remediated or have work under way. The number of buildings that are being fixed by the building safety fund has doubled in the past year. The pilot for our new mid-rise scheme is making good progress ahead of its full opening in the coming months.

What recent progress he has made on cladding and non-cladding remediation for residential buildings.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the plight of his constituents, but the action we have already taken will ensure not only that the ultimate owners of those buildings—whether that is the

developers or the freeholders—are responsible for remediation, but that those leaseholders who are currently trapped and unable to move will be able to do so and to secure a mortgage on their property if required.

Even after the horrors of the Grenfell tragedy in 2017, the Government have failed abysmally to get to grips with the cladding scandal. While the Government dither and developers delay, the leaseholders of potentially dangerously clad apartments are stuck in limbo. Many, including people living in West Central in Slough constituency, and in other blocks, cannot sell or remortgage their apartments, and many face ever-rising service charges and other charges that they cannot now meet. Does the Secretary of State think it is fair for my Slough constituents to have to continue to suffer intolerably under such dire and demoralising conditions?

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. We hope, in the forthcoming King’s Speech, to introduce legislation to fundamentally reform the system. Leaseholders, not just in this case but in so many other cases, are held to ransom by freeholders. We need to end this feudal form of tenure and ensure individuals have the right to enjoy their own property fully.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that issues like the cladding scandal being foisted on innocent leaseholders will continue until there is fundamental reform of the leasehold system? I know he has plans to do that. When does he think they might be put into effect?

My constituent Joanne Davies faces a nightmare scenario. In a few weeks’ time, she will have to fork out £5,000 because of regulatory change in the light of Grenfell. She gets no support because she lives in a low-rise block. Will the Minister meet me to discuss her case?

The hon. Lady is absolutely right. Not only have insurance premiums been too high, but some of the middle people involved have been gouging at the expense of leaseholders. We have made it clear that there are responsibilities on the Association of British Insurers and others to change their ways. The Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, my hon. Friend the Member for North East Derbyshire (Lee Rowley), is responsible for local government and engaged in work to make progress on that.