Memorandum submitted by John Archibald
INTRODUCTION
1. I am a serving Greater Manchester Police
constable currently working as a Counter Terrorism Security Advisor
within the Greater Manchester Police Counter Terrorism Unit. My
role involves providing counter terrorism protective security
advice with the main focus of my work currently being Crowded
Places. In terms of the Government's counter terrorism strategy
then my work falls under the Protect and Prepare strands.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2. The purpose of this submission is to
illustrate that the current voluntary scheme allowing companies
and organisations to choose whether they attend briefings and
training events designed to raise their awareness of the terrorist
threat we face is not effective. The briefings give practical,
hands on advice of action they should take when they are faced
with hostile reconnaissance and there should be a mandatory requirement
for companies operating within the "crowded places"
arena to attend such events.
CROWDED PLACES
3. The intention of the Crowded Places work
stream is to identify and address the vulnerabilities of those
sites that are deemed to be at greatest risk from a terrorist
attack.
4. The process starts with drawing up a
list of crowded places sites that may be at relatively high risk
of terrorist attack. We then apply a risk assessment filter that
looks at the attractiveness of a site and the potential impact
of an attack.
5. Sites that are passed through to the
second stage are then surveyed to identify their vulnerabilities
and recommendations are made to address these vulnerabilities.
The recommendations we make fall under four broad headings: Vehicle
access; Personnel access; Building construction; Staff awareness
& contingency planning.
Once the recommendations have been made it is
for the site to apply them. There are no powers that we as CTSA's
can use to ensure that they do.
6. Some of the recommendations involve the
sites spending considerable sums of money. Measures, such as bollards
and planters to mitigate against hostile vehicles can cost considerable
sums of money and I accept that it may be undesirable to compel
sites to comply with recommendations that may affect their ability
to operate as commercial companies. However, there are recommendations
that are not costly options and these involve raising the awareness
of staff.
7. This process involves CTSA's giving briefings
and running training exercises to increase people's knowledge
and understanding, specifically:
— The process that terrorists go through
when they are planning an attack.
— The importance of hostile reconnaissance
to the attack planning process.
— The behaviour and activities of individuals
involved in hostile reconnaissance; what action the sites should
take if they suspect hostile reconnaissance is taking place.
— Contingency planning for the aftermath
of a terrorist attack.
8. Within GMP this is achieved by delivering
Project Argus events and Project Griffin briefings. Project Argus
is a workshop based on a video scenario involving a terrorist
attack and is aimed at the retail industry, night time economy
and professionals operating within the construction industry (architects,
planners and structural engineers).
9. Apart from the abstraction of staff for
the duration of the event there is no charge for the Argus event.
We rely on an organisation to provide a suitable venue for the
event and they are run depending on our ability to generate sufficient
interest in organisations and their willingness to host the event.
Since we started Argus events GMP has run 32 of them.
10. It has been suggested that not making
a charge for attending an Argus is counter productive as organisations
perceive it as an inferior product and that it would be better
received by the management if we were to make a nominal charge
for it. Making a charge might also prevent the situation we experience
where a significant number of people say they will attend but
then do not turn up for the event. Generally, if the organisation
providing the venue has sufficient staff to send to the event
then it will be well attended. Difficulties have arisen where
the organiser acts as landlord to a group of tenants. In these
situations we have found it difficult to generate sufficient numbers
of attendees. People seem initially keen and say they will attend
but appear to change their mind at the last minute.
11. Griffin briefings are aimed at security
practitioners (door staff and security personnel). We run the
Griffin briefing every month at the Force Training School and
make a nominal charge of £25 per attendee. The briefings
are generally well attended with around 20 to 25 delegates. Delegates
are given a Project Griffin pin badge and a certificate of attendance.
Perhaps because we make a charge there is usually a higher attendance
rate than for Argus.
12. I think the issue is that we have no
power to request the attendance of people at these events. This
is despite these briefings being one of the most important ways
we have to address some of the vulnerabilities that are identified
in the survey report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
13. I would like attendance at Griffin briefings
and Argus events to be made compulsory for security staff and
management at crowded place sites. This is such a key component
in the limited range of options we have available to us to address
the vulnerabilities of crowded places that it is too important
for it to be left to the whim of the venue or site as to whether
or not they should attend.
14. The Griffin awareness input could become
a mandatory element of the Security Industry Authority. The SIA
exist to manage the licensing of the private security industry
as set out in the Private Security Industry Act 2001. This would
ensure that staff whose work, on a daily basis puts them in a
position to identify the hostile reconnaissance phase of terrorist
attack planning have received the appropriate awareness training.
Not all security staff are SIA accredited, but this would cover
a significant number of people. Additionally attendance at a Griffin
briefing or Argus event could be made a condition of the license
granted to night time economy operators (bars, pubs and clubs).
15. The issue of how to ensure the attendance
of companies within the other categories of crowded places, such
as retail premises is more difficult. However, the aim should
be to link attendance at an Argus event with some form of licensing
system. For example within Greater Manchester the North Manchester
Division operate a competition for licensed premises called "Best
Bar None" that has made attendance at a Griffin event part
of the scoring system.
16. I do not think the current, voluntary
attendance is disseminating the information to a wide enough audience
quickly enough. The subject is too important for it to be left
to individual whim.
January 2009
| 
