The Retailer Autumn Edition 2021

THE RE TA I L ER

50

AFGHAN WITHDRAWAL COULD TRIGGER A RENEWED TERRORIST THREAT FOR UK RETAILERS.

Scott Bolton Director Business Development & Network Relations Aon

R etailers must review their preparedness for a poten- tial rise in attacks. Following the West’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, concerns have grown that the Taliban’s success will lead to an increase in ter- rorism targeted at those nations who took part in the 20-year campaign. While a direct threat to western countries from any Afghanistan originated terrorist activity is probably some months – to a year or more – away, the influ - ence on homegrown individuals inspired by the Taliban could lead to a more immediate increase in attacks. This raised threat level also comes at a time when many countries expect to see a rise in right wing and left-wing extremism as economies rebound post-pandemic and lockdowns ease. Given this uncertain backdrop, it’s vital that UK retailers – facing potential increased duty of care obligations to employees and shoppers from Protect Duty legislation, – don’t allow other operational pressures to detract from the need to review and commit to their terrorism preparedness and response plans, as well as re-examining their insurance arrangements against an ever-changing terrorism threat and the ever broader impacts the attacks can deliver.

UK terrorists “emboldened” The MI5’s Director General recently told the BBC that 31 late-stage terror plots had been foiled in the UK over the last four years, com- bining a mixture of Islamic extremist-based threats but also attacks planned by right-wing extremists. On the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban however, he was unequivocal that those events will have further “heartened and emboldened” UK terrorists in the short term as well as in the long term, with a need to be vigilant “both for the increase in inspired terrorism which has become a real trend for us to deal with over the last five to 10 years, alongside the potential regrowth of al Qaeda- style directed plots.” For Islamic extremism, it’s now less about dam- aging infrastructure, and more about targeting people which makes retail premises obvious targets. The UK’s Martyn’s Law (the Protect Duty) – expected soon on the statute books – recognises the risk of terrorism to the public and places a higher duty of care on businesses that have significant public footfall. This includes retailers selling on the high street whowill need to show that they have properly planned and prepared to both mitigate the risk of terrorism towards their staff and customers, and be able to show that their incident response is fit for purpose. This requirement of course, comes at a time when many retailers have moved to change their business model by creating destinations offering leisure experiences to draw in crowds, complementing shopping to reverse the trend of declining footfall. For Islamic militant inspired groups, attacks on crowded spaces provide opportunity to create more publicity for their cause.

Howto respond to a terrorist threat

From a practical perspective, retailers will need to be aware that any police response to an attack could be several minutes away; until the police arrive, anymanaged response rests with them. Terrorism is like any other risk in terms of making sure a business understands what the exposure is, what the impact might be and what levers it has in its control to manage the risk. How, for example, to limit the opportunity for any attacker to get close to the people in a retailer’s care? Measures could include quickly being able to restrict ground floor access as well as (where possible) vertical movement through a store; facilitating the safe evacuation of people away from a threat while containing the attacker themselves. Beyond getting the planning and preparation right, demonstrating this through detailed documentation, and embedding through reg - ular practise of response plans, other areas to address include assessing whether insurance arrangements have adapted to the changing threat. With terrorists increasingly targeting people rather than buildings, property damage costs are unlikely to be the largest (non-life) loss. However, losses from reduced footfall (loss of attraction), or where the police close large areas of a town or city in response to a threat meaning staff and customers can’t access the retail premises, is likely to be more significant (non-damage business interruption). The 2017 panic in Oxford Circus which led to police to cordoning off the area, was the biggest loss from a “terrorist” event in the last decade or so because it happened on Black Friday, even though the alarm itself proved to be false.

It’s a risk that cannot afford to be ignored as a genuine threat to the safety of shoppers and employees, but also one that has the ability to destroy balance sheets and reputations.” ‘‘