WHAT’S NEXT FOR CRITICAL SITE SECURITY?
The National Protective Security Authority (NPSA) has recently announced that from 1st January 2026, fencing and gates will be removed from its Catalogue of Security Equipment (CSE).
In addition, the organisation is no longer testing these products against the Manual Forced Entry Standard (MFES).
Cris Francis, Commercial Director at Jacksons Fencing commented: “On the face of it, this change may appear to be a technical adjustment in the way products are assessed. In reality, it creates uncertainty for architects, specifiers, and security professionals tasked with protecting the UK’s most critical national infrastructure (CNI) and high risk assets. NPSA approved fencing was historically applied to high-assurance government and national infrastructure sites.
“Alongside the announcement, the NPSA referenced BS 1722, the long-established British Standard for fencing. Whilst this standard serves a purpose, it is fundamentally limited. Unlike rigorous third-party certification schemes, compliance with BS 1722 does not involve independent testing or ongoing audits. Instead, it relies on manufacturers issuing a statement of conformity, with no external verification. This leaves specifiers with little assurance that the product they are selecting will perform in practice, particularly when faced with determined, hostile threats.
“As a result, very few – if any – serious security projects in the UK rely on BS 1722 alone.
A more robust framework exists in the form of the Loss Prevention Certification Board’s (LPCB) LPS 1175 standard. LPS 1175 is globally recognised and provides a detailed classification system for security products, grading them from A1 (previously SR1) through to H20, based on how long they can resist different levels of forced entry attack.
“However, even this system has its limitations. An annual audit may confirm how a product is manufactured, but it does not cover how it is installed on site, or the maintenance requirements of differing systems.
“For true assurance, specifiers need to go beyond tick-box standards. The ideal solution combines proven resistance to attack verified through schemes such as LPS 1175 and the now-defunct MFES, manufacturer guarantees covering the longevity and durability of the system, along with maintenance requirements and expert installation and advice ensuring the system performs as designed in the real world.
“This holistic approach is the only way to close the gap between certification on paper and security in practice,” added Cris.
