🔍 Extremism Review

• The Government is committed to countering extremism, including online radicalization, through various strategies such as appointing an interim Prevent commissioner, Lord Anderson, and introducing youth diversion orders to tackle young people at risk of terrorism.

• A leaked report on extremism reviewed by the Home Office does not represent current Government policy. The report did not recommend expanding the definition of extremism, despite containing proposals to extend it to include misinformation and online misogyny.

• The Minister emphasized that Islamist extremism and far-right extremism remain the biggest threats faced by the UK. There has been a concerning rise in youth extremism, including those drawn to mixed ideologies and an obsession with violence.

• The Home Secretary is reviewing the Prevent programme, particularly the thresholds on Islamist extremism, due to low referral numbers. There has been a troubling increase in teenagers investigated for terrorism, including a threefold rise in under-18s and 162 referrals for concerns related to school massacres.

• Discussions included measures to restrict access to knives and other weapons to combat knife crime, with new age verification rules planned for online knife sales.

• The Government is focused on reducing violence against women and girls, pointing to an ambitious target of halving such violence over 10 years.

• Concerns were raised about the leaked report’s language around issues like grooming gangs and two-tier policing, with a call for the Government to distance itself from suggestions that these concerns are far-right.

• The Minister stated that the Government will continue to work collaboratively to address extremism threats and that leaks of reports are wrong, but he expressed pride in the work of Home Office civil servants.

• The Online Safety Act 2023 was highlighted as a forthcoming measure to tackle illegal content online and extremism.

• There were calls for the Government to engage more effectively with communities on counter-extremism strategies and to ensure that policies do not discriminate against particular groups.

The disagreement in the session can be rated as a 3 out of 5 due to several instances of contention between the speakers, but not at the level of severe conflict. The primary disagreements stem from the leaked report on extremism and its implications for policy, as well as from differing priorities and approaches to addressing extremism and related issues like knife crime and police engagement with communities.

Examples of Disagreements: 1. Leaked Report and Policy Direction: Chris Philp and other Conservative MPs like James Cleverly and Lee Anderson express strong concerns about the leaked extremism review and its recommendations, such as potentially expanding the definition of extremism to include spreading misinformation or misogyny. These MPs argue against diluting the focus of counter-terrorism efforts away from Islamist and far-right extremism, and they criticize the report’s implications on freedom of speech (Philp, Cleverly). In response, Minister Dan Jarvis repeatedly clarifies that the leaked documents do not represent current or planned government policy, indicating a clear disagreement on the direction and scope of counter-extremism policies.

1. Engagement with Communities: There is contention over government engagement with specific communities and organizations, notably the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). Jeremy Corbyn presses for inclusive consultation, while Nick Timothy questions the consistency of government policy regarding engagement with the MCB. Jarvis responds by reaffirming current policy without changes, showing a disagreement on community engagement strategies.

2. Policing and Non-Crime Hate Incidents: The approach to policing and the recording of non-crime hate incidents also sparks debate. Chris Philp advocates for retaining changes to non-crime hate incident policies to prevent what he sees as a waste of police resources and infringements on free speech. In contrast, Dan Jarvis emphasizes a sensible and consistent approach to such incidents while prioritizing broader policing missions like knife crime reduction, indicating a disagreement on how policing should handle less overt issues related to extremism.

3. Knife Crime and Misogyny: There are differing views on how serious issues such as knife crime, youth violence, and misogyny should be addressed. While some MPs like Amanda Martin and Caroline Voaden call for stronger measures to restrict knife sales and address misogyny as a form of extremism, others like Dan Jarvis focus on existing government commitments and legislative actions, suggesting a disagreement on the urgency and specifics of these measures.

Overall, the session reflects moderate disagreement centered around policy interpretations, the scope of extremism, and how to prioritize and approach related societal issues. The exchanges maintain a level of decorum without descending into highly divisive or confrontational territory, justifying a rating of 3.