A draft terrorism protection law drawn up after campaigning by the mother of a Manchester Arena bombing victim would not have made a difference to the vast majority of recent attacks, a report says.

Martyn’s Law, named in tribute to 29-year-old Martyn Hett, who was one of 22 people killed at the end of an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017, will require venues and local authorities in the UK to have preventative plans against terror attacks.

However, the Home Affairs Select Committee has warned the draft Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill would put small businesses and organisations at risk of closure and fail to “make a significant impact” on preventing attacks.

MPs found the current Bill, which has different standards based on venue capacity, would require a local village hall to have certain safety precautions, while an outdoor market in a city centre would not.

They said it is a “concern” that attacks which have occurred in some parts of the UK, such as in Scotland, would not fall into the draft Bill’s scope.

Mr Hett’s mother Figen Murray, who has long campaigned for the new rules, said the legislation represented an “important step forward” when details were published over two months ago.

However, the committee said after looking at the draft it has “serious concerns” about the financial burden of requiring venues to have potentially costly safety measures in place.

MPs said the Bill’s aims are “unclear”, as it was promoted as terror prevention legislation, but instead most of the measures act to reduce the consequences of attacks.

Jonathan Hall KC, the UK’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, told MPs the majority of attacks since 2010 would be out of the Bill’s “scope”.

The report said: “We are concerned to learn that the draft Bill would not have made a difference to the vast majority of the terrorist attacks that have happened in the UK in recent years.

“This suggests that the draft Bill will not achieve some of its main objectives.”

The committee called for legislation to be introduced in stages, beginning with larger venues, and cover outdoor events at risk of attack, also urging the Government to ensure mandatory “live-saving” medical training is offered by premises.

It commended Ms Murray’s campaigning efforts, saying the Bill has the right intent.

The Government must ensure that the steps they need to take are based on an accurate assessment of risk and not arbitrary capacity figures

Chair Dame Diana Johnson said: “We must do all we can to ensure venues are equipped to react to terror threats. But the Government must ensure that the steps they need to take are based on an accurate assessment of risk and not arbitrary capacity figures.

“We are also concerned that this Bill as currently drafted would fail to make a significant impact in preventing or mitigating the effects of terrorism.

“For example, in its current form a local village hall would be required to carry out safety precautions while a city centre open-air farmers market or Christmas market would not. This makes little sense and takes no account of the actual terrorist threat they face.

“Also the costs in money and time required under the Bill could place the very future of some smaller businesses and voluntary organisations at risk.

“With many venues already struggling with the cost of living, including energy bills, they are ill-equipped to absorb more financial pressure. In particular losing any vital community hubs such as a village hall would be a real blow and represent a win for terrorism, not an effective means of combatting it.”

After the draft law was published, Ms Murray praised the work of the Home Office, expressing hope it will meet her expectations after years of work.

She told the PA news agency in May: “I am sure there will be areas that could be improved but I am the kind of person who thinks four years ago we were at the very start of this and look what we have achieved so far.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Government is committed to improving security at public venues and the pre-legislative scrutiny process will ensure we create a strong Bill that delivers on this aim whilst being proportionate.

“We will carefully review the recommendations of the report and we are committed to introducing the Bill as soon as Parliamentary time allows.”