← Back to House of Commons Debates
Extremism Definition and Community Engagement
14 March 2024
Lead MP
Michael Gove
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
Crime & Law EnforcementCommunity Security
Other Contributors: 38
At a Glance
Michael Gove raised concerns about extremism definition and community engagement in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities announced a new strategy to counter extremism in the UK. He emphasised that extremism can lead to radicalisation and weaken social cohesion. The statement highlighted the work of civil society organisations combating antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred, with funding provided for groups like CST and Tell MAMA. A new fund will support grassroots organisations working against division, while a rigorous definition of extremism is introduced to prevent unintended state endorsement of extremist views. The updated definition aims to clarify which ideologies fall under the extremism label, focusing on violence, hatred, intolerance, undermining democracy, and creating permissive environments for such results. The Government will establish a new counter-extremism centre of excellence within the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to enhance frontline work against radicalisation. The statement also addressed Islamism's distinctiveness from Islam, identifying specific organisations with Islamist orientations as a concern. Further steps will include responding to reports on social cohesion and political violence.
Paul Bristow
Con
Sudbury
Question
The MP inquired about the role of local councils in combating extremism. He sought clarity on whether councils should be proactive or reactive, and asked if funding would be provided to train councillors.
Minister reply
The minister acknowledged that tackling extremism is a shared responsibility and stated that councils are encouraged to take a proactive approach. Training for councillors will be made available through the new fund announced in the statement.
Rachael Maskell
Lab
York Central
Question
The MP raised concerns about the definition of extremism potentially affecting legitimate political and social activism, including environmental protest groups. She asked for reassurance that these would not be impacted.
Minister reply
The minister clarified that the new definition will protect fundamental rights and freedoms, ensuring that legitimate political and social activities are unaffected, while targeting extremist ideologies based on violence, hatred, and intolerance.
Chris Clarkson
Lab
Bolton West
Question
The MP questioned whether the Prevent strategy could inadvertently harm individuals by creating a chilling effect. He asked for assurances that there would be due process before any individual is labelled an extremist.
Minister reply
The minister emphasised that due diligence will be applied to prevent unintended consequences and protect civil liberties. Any actions taken will follow proper procedures to ensure fairness.
Nickie Aiken
Con
City of London and Westminster
Question
The MP inquired about specific steps the Government would take to address online extremism, particularly among social media platforms.
Minister reply
The minister confirmed that addressing online extremism is a priority. The Department will work with other government departments to implement measures against online hate and ensure platforms are held accountable.
Angela Rayner
Lab
Ashton-under-Lyne
Question
I start by thanking the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement, and for his briefing yesterday. The shadow Secretary of State mentioned the leaking of some information relating to our work on this issue. I deprecate that leaking, which is a fundamental challenge to the effective operation of government, and a leak inquiry has been commissioned in order to see how some of the information about today’s statement was shared.
Minister reply
I am very grateful to the shadow Secretary of State for the constructive, detailed and consensual approach that she is taking to what are inevitably challenging and difficult issues. I enjoyed the opportunity to talk to her and other Labour colleagues yesterday, and I look forward to working together in the future.
Question
I am glad to follow both Front Benchers, who have given a lead to the House. It is interesting to consider whether it would have been right 90 years ago to identify as a threat Oswald Mosley’s approach, as well as the people who marched through the streets to intimidate others. More recently, when Kathleen Stock was at the University of Sussex, the students’ union and many others called her a dangerous extremist for writing a rather good book and having views that are now mainstream.
Minister reply
I am very grateful to the Father of the House. There should, rightly, be a high bar on the use of criminal sanctions. We should always seek to encourage free speech, but he is quite right to draw attention to the freedom-restricting harassment that some people have engaged in. I completely endorse the point he makes about Kathleen Stock, who is a distinguished academic.
Alison Thewliss
SNP
Glasgow Central
Question
Ms Alison Thewliss questioned the Secretary of State about the proposed new definition for extremism. She expressed concern that it could undermine the UK’s reputation and disproportionately target Muslim communities. The Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Jonathan Hall, has also raised concerns over undemocratic, divisive, and potentially illegal aspects of the proposal. She inquired whether Muslim groups specifically mentioned by the Secretary of State had been contacted prior to today's statement.
Minister reply
Mr Gove acknowledged that it is important not to conflate the challenge from certain Islamist groups with the broader Muslim community. He also stated his serious concern about racism and misogyny, such as those expressed in statements by Frank Hester.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Question
Mr Julian Lewis argued that the Government is not proposing to ban any organisation from operating legally but rather setting a threshold for organisations receiving funding or other support from the Government. He mentioned that Labour has banned seven extreme-left organisations as incompatible with party membership since July 2021.
Minister reply
Mr Gove thanked his right hon. Friend and confirmed that the threshold for proscription is high, citing Hizb ut-Tahrir's recent meeting of this criteria. He emphasised that the Government does not seek to ban or restrict organisations in a free society but rather prevent taxpayers' money from supporting such groups.
Diana R. Johnson
Lab
Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham
Question
Ms Diana R. Johnson questioned whether the Secretary of State has had conversations with the Home Office about a response to Dame Sara Khan’s report, and how this new definition will affect the policing of protests.
Minister reply
Mr Gove stated that he has worked closely with the Home Secretary and Security Minister on framing the definition. He acknowledged that work in this space is shared between his Department and the Home Office. There will be further responses to recommendations from Dame Sara Khan's report.
Priti Patel
Con
Witham
Question
Ms Priti Patel asked about the evidential threshold that would apply when compiling the list of organisations and guidance, as well as how this guidance would be applied against existing legal definitions.
Minister reply
Mr Gove said there is an argument for looking again at laws to ensure they are fit for purpose but today’s definition does not change criminal law. The threshold will be evidenced when publishing a list of organisations that meet the bar, with evidence showing that their ideology is extremist in nature.
Stephen Timms
Lab
East Ham
Question
Mr Stephen Timms criticised the Secretary of State for closing down the Inter Faith Network and asked if an organisation unjustly found on the proposed list would have an opportunity to appeal.
Minister reply
Mr Gove clarified that they ceased funding, not closed down the Inter Faith Network. He stated that due diligence will be applied and if anyone believes the Government has acted unreasonably, judicial review is available.
Question
Mr Robert Buckland welcomed the statement but noted a danger in wording such as ‘intentionally create a permissive environment’. He asked for guidance on what it precisely means and whether engagement with organisations should be inhibited.
Minister reply
Mr Gove assured that the definition does not cover activities where security services and law enforcement actors have to deal with unsavoury individuals. He stated there is no intention to inhibit their work.
Imran Hussain
Lab
Bradford East
Question
Mr Imran Hussain criticised the Secretary of State for not seriously addressing issues and continuing the Tory agenda of culture wars. He called on him to condemn extremist language used by some Back Benchers.
Minister reply
Mr Gove thanked the hon. Gentleman and stated his determination to operate consensually, noting that there will be debate, challenge, and differences in opinion but it is a shared endeavour.
Robert Jenrick
Reform
Newark
Question
My right hon. Friend has, for a very long time, been consistent and clear-eyed about the threats that we face, for which I applaud him... What reassurance can my right hon. Friend give to me and others who are concerned about that?
Minister reply
When my right hon. Friend held my current post, he took forward immensely valuable work to counter anti-Muslim hatred and antisemitism... The rigour of the definition needed to be updated, which is what we are doing.
Question
This new definition will require careful scrutiny of its compliance with human rights such as the right to freedom of expression, religion and belief... Will the Secretary of State join me in reminding Members of this House of their responsibility not to use their positions to stifle legitimate debate that makes an important contribution to our democracy?
Minister reply
I am grateful to the hon. and learned Lady for her point... It is right that there should be debate on gender and sex questions, and I commend the Government for the steps they have taken to ban puberty blockers.
Kit Malthouse
Con
North West Hampshire
Question
I share, along with many other Members, some alarm at the emergence of this new definition... At what stage in the process will those groups that he decides are worthy of examination be able to present evidence in their defence?
Minister reply
Again, I am grateful to my right hon. Friend and commend him on the work he did in the Home Office during his time there... This is purely about Government; Parliament is, quite rightly, sovereign.
Jeremy Corbyn
Ind
Islington North
Question
Following the point made by the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse), I urge the Secretary of State to be cautious in all of this... Will he assure us—because this is not mentioned anywhere in this document—that there is no plan by the Government or the Conservative party to withdraw from the European convention on human rights and therefore from the European Court of Human Rights?
Minister reply
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the points he makes... Of course, it is always within the human heart to have the capacity to change and reform.
Question
Of course, the first duty of any state is to protect its citizens and maintain national security. Many of us have different experiences of dealing with extremism... I mean no disrespect to current or future Ministers, but giving Ministers that responsibility raises a real concern, because it then comes down to each Minister’s own judgment.
Minister reply
I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has endured the consequences of extremism himself and has been a very valuable voice for religious freedom for many years... It is also why the Government continue to fund the excellent organisation Tell MAMA, whose founder I had the opportunity to meet again yesterday to discuss the approach that we are taking.
Hayes and Harlington
Question
Raises concerns about the smear campaign against the Muslim Council of Britain and questions the lack of an appeal process for organisations and individuals affected by decisions made by the Secretary of State.
Minister reply
Responds that the Labour Government under Gordon Brown raised similar concerns. The Minister emphasises scrutiny before engagement with any organisation, but notes that no steps will be taken without clear evidence.
Question
Supports the minister's aims but expresses concern over criminalising speech and chilling effects on free expression, particularly for gender critical feminists. Raises issues regarding impartiality of civil servants.
Minister reply
Reassures that the definition is narrow to protect free speech, clarifies there will be no ban under this policy, and affirms engagement should not include extremist groups.
Richard Foord
Lib Dem
Honiton and Sidmouth
Question
Asks the Secretary of State to reflect on criticisms from independent reviewers regarding the proposals for a new non-statutory definition of extremism.
Minister reply
Acknowledges support from Lord Mann, who considers this an improvement over existing definitions. Emphasises clarity and transparency in government engagement decisions.
Edward Leigh
Con
Gainsborough
Question
Concerned about the potential for increasing intolerance towards the right to offend, particularly concerning criticism of religions.
Minister reply
Agrees with concerns over free speech, stating that the definition tightens existing criteria and ensures clarity on government engagement without stifling debate.
Andrew Slaughter
Lab
Hammersmith and Chiswick
Question
Questions the Secretary of State's stance on extremism given his acceptance of funds from Sir Paul Marshall, who has made inflammatory statements.
Minister reply
Deprecates personal attacks, highlighting Marshall’s philanthropic work and support for state schools that benefit minority children.
Question
Concerned about the slippery slope leading to restrictions on free speech due to increasing Islamophobia and recent events in Gaza.
Minister reply
Acknowledges rising anti-Muslim hate crimes and affirms the need for careful engagement with organisations. Emphasises the goal of presenting a united front against such hatred.
Question
Highlights unease among Back Benchers and concerns over the culture war rhetoric, questioning if this is part of election strategy.
Minister reply
Acknowledges differences but respects all Members' right to express their views. Emphasises that the definition does not inhibit free speech.
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
Question
By stating that a free society requires that the Muslim religion accommodates itself to the same level of scrutiny, criticism and even blasphemy that Christianity has become accustomed to, am I straying into the Secretary of State’s permissive environment? I am not an extremist, am I?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend is many, many things: learned, wise, kind, a champion of the New Forest and a distinguished former educationalist. He is not an extremist, and I shall continue to admire the rigour with which he prosecutes his case.
Question
I share the concern of my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) that Government Departments may have been engaging with extremists and racists in the past. The Secretary of State seems to indicate that engagement, or lack of engagement, is dependent on the definition. Is it not also dependent on the common sense of Ministers? If Ministers are willing to engage with extremists and racists, surely they should not be Ministers in the first place.
Minister reply
I absolutely take the hon. Member’s point. The key thing here is that sometimes there are organisations and individuals that seek to operate by presenting one face to one group and a different face to another. That is why we need due diligence. Mistakes have been made in the past. I think those mistakes were made in good faith and unwittingly, but as has been pointed out by Members from across this House, a number of people have expressed their concern about those past errors. That is why we need a tighter, more precise definition.
Andrew Rosindell
Con
Romford
Question
I commend the Government on what they are attempting to do to oppose and fight all forms of extremism and hatred in our country. Does the Secretary of State agree that what underpins Britain is our ancient liberties and freedoms, free speech and the rule of law, which uphold our democracy under the Crown? Does he believe, as I do, that we must defend all our British values and traditions? We must teach them in schools, and we must ensure that British values are the order of the day.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend makes a very important point. In our schools and other institutions, we should make sure that people from every background are acquainted with our history and taught the very British habits of scepticism, questioning and sometimes raucous expressions of opposition to Governments and others. That spirit of democratic challenge is core to this country, and no one better exemplifies being able to speak out without fear or favour than my hon. Friend.
Claire Hanna
SDLP
Belfast South and Mid Down
Question
The press release attached to this statement, which refers to 7 October, seems to imply, deliberately or otherwise, that protests and other human responses to the horrors of the Hamas attacks on Israel and the bombardment of Gaza are extreme. In my diverse and shared Belfast South constituency, we are battling extremism at the moment, in the form of a rash of menacing and racist posters about foreigners and housing. It is my genuine belief that that rhetoric is being fanned by this Government—the Government of a party funded by a person who says that they hate all black women. It is worth mentioning that Northern Ireland Office Ministers met representatives of paramilitaries during their negotiations on the withdrawal agreement. This kind of politics and the departure from pluralism and tolerance are part of the reason why I and many others advocate for a new Ireland by exclusively peaceful and democratic means. That would of course undermine and change the constitution of the United Kingdom and its democracy. Can the Secretary of State confirm that people like me, who advocate for a new Ireland, are not extremists under the second part of his definition?
Minister reply
No, of course not. The Social Democratic and Labour party has a long and proud tradition of arguing for Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to become a new state, and that has an impeccable political tradition. As she rightly points out, many people wish to protest about what is happening in the middle east. We may disagree about aspects of that conflict, but I hope we all share a sincere desire to bring peace to the middle east. We all deprecate the regrettable incidents of prejudice on the streets of South Belfast.
Question
I welcome the clear statement today. It is right that we openly debate and tackle extremism in this place. At this time of tension and sensitivity, does the Secretary of State agree that politicians have a responsibility to dial down the rhetoric, that divisions must not be exploited for political gain, and that we all must work together across the House to achieve that?
Minister reply
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. His distinguished career of public service even before he entered this House shows a commitment to working across divides to strengthen our democracy.
Question
The Secretary of State spoke of sharing his workings about affected organisations. He did not share his workings after his abrupt decision to pull Government funding from the Inter Faith Network, causing that respected organisation to close. How does he explain the contradiction between his words and his recent actions?
Minister reply
A letter was published outlining the reasoning behind that, and the Government are only one of a number of funders of the Inter Faith Network.
Question
I do not want to be accused of dialling up the rhetoric, but I must say that I and millions of people in this country are utterly fed up with these protests that have been taking place in our nation’s capital. Not every person who attends these protests is an extremist, and not every person who attends these protests is a radical, but many are, and they are going unchallenged. I have Jewish friends who will not go into their own capital because they do not feel safe, and it is weekend after weekend after weekend. When is something going to happen? All the public see is impotence. It is fuelling extremism, and it is linked to this debate. If the situation does not get any better, and we continue to see hate on our streets going unchallenged, is the Government prepared to strip responsibility for policing in London from the Mayor of London, and to give a far stronger steer to the Metropolitan police, who every weekend, from what I can see, are failing to stand up for our values, and for Jewish people, so that they feel safe?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend speaks passionately about this. I know from talking to Jewish friends that some of the statements and actions that accompany these marches cause them to feel a profound sense of fear. That has been well recorded not just by the Government’s Commission for Countering Extremism, but by Members of this House, so I share his concern for the Jewish community.
I should say that the Metropolitan Police Commissioner takes his responsibilities very seriously. There have been a number of arrests alongside these marches, and individuals have been prosecuted for incitement and for hateful actions. In addition, my colleagues in the Home Office have commissioned a report from Baron Walney, John Woodcock as was, looking at how we give the police all the powers that they need. We will come forward in due course with a response to that report.
Richard Burgon
Lab
Leeds East
Question
I am afraid that the statement has not assuaged the fears that so many have about what the Government are really up to here. Given recent events, on which the Secretary of State was remarkably silent in his statement, may I ask whether we should count as an extremist someone saying that an MP should be shot? Or are those who have donated £10 million to the Conservative party exempt from such definitions? Would the Tory party not be better off getting its own house in order, rather than making this clearly political intervention, which has more to do with the upcoming general election, and trying to silence the huge numbers of peaceful opponents of the Government’s Gaza policy, than it has with public safety?
Minister reply
As I mentioned earlier, speaking as someone who was the victim of a determined effort to kill me, and because the individual who was trying to kill me went on to kill a friend and colleague from this House, I take incredibly seriously threats of violence. I have long admired the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), and I have no hesitation in stating that those comments were disgusting, but the intention in bringing forward this definition today is to make sure that the Government—we are talking about only the Government—work with organisations that are committed to peace and greater social cohesion. I hope that, on reflection, the hon. Member will recognise that we can work together to deal with these hateful extremists, whose actions we both, I am sure, deprecate.
Question
My right hon. Friend will understand that the people of Southend West will welcome his statement, and appreciate his commitment to tackling extremism, but they also know that the devil is not just in the detail, but in the enforcement. They have seen the antisemitic slogan “From the river to the sea” projected on to their Parliament—if such slogans are not already against the law, they certainly should be—and they have seen the police take insufficient action. On marches against the middle east war in Southend, we have seen dolls covered in white bandages, spattered with a red substance, and placards saying, “Anna Firth kills babies”. Clearly, both those things are, if not extreme, then very close to being within my right hon. Friend’s definition of extremism. Can he assure me and the House that we will ensure that the message about what is extremism and what is against the law gets through to the police, and that appropriate action is taken?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is correct to draw attention to the fact that there have been occasions recently when people motivated to make a particular point have crossed the threshold. I know that the police take those transgressions incredibly seriously, as do the Security Minister and the Home Secretary.
Question
Over the past week, as we have meandered towards this statement, much of the debate has been played out in the press; there have been definitions, and various organisations that could potentially be proscribed have been named. How can my constituents in Ilford South have any faith in the Secretary of State’s ability to decide who is, and who is not, an extremist? I ask because it has also been briefed that his preferred appointment as the anti-Muslim hatred adviser is Haras Rafiq, the former chief executive officer of the Quilliam Foundation, which worked with US anti-Muslim think-tanks and promoted the favourite theory of Nick Griffin, the great replacement theory—a conspiracy theory that is so debunked and extreme that it should be nowhere near the thinking of the Secretary of State. Yesterday, most damningly, Tommy Robinson, a far-right extremist—everyone in this House knows who he is—praised that appointment. How can my constituents have faith that the decisions the Secretary of State will make are not politicised?
Minister reply
Because we will publish the evidence behind them.
Bob Blackman
Con
Harrow East
Question
I warmly welcome today’s statement, but we have to consider the fact that organisations are populated by individuals. Individuals who have hateful views may be expelled by those organisations, or may go off and form other organisations that will not be on the banned list. As the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) said, it is individuals who seek to radicalise young people, either from abroad or in the UK. What action will the Secretary of State take to ensure that foreign nationals who seek to radicalise our young people are prevented from doing so?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend makes a very good point, related to that made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick). The Home Office is vigilant about who it allows to come here, and it conducts appropriate work to ensure that visas are not granted to people who are here to sow division and hate.
Question
We know from the work of the Intelligence and Security Committee, under the leadership of the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), and its report on extreme right-wing terrorism that a number of people are radicalised not simply by shadowy organisations on the dark web, but at least in part by the mainstream media. How does the Secretary of State see his statement and his definition of the creation of a permissive environment—I am thinking of calling judges “Enemies of the people”—intersecting with the mainstream media?
Minister reply
All of us have a responsibility to be vigilant about the dangers of extremism. I am grateful to many media outlets for shining a light on extremism, from the BBC to The Times. The hon. Gentleman mentions one particular newspaper headline. He may disagree with it or find it objectionable, but the most important thing to recognise is that a vigorous culture of free speech, sustained by a free and independent press, is a critical part of our democratic culture.
Shadow Comment
Angela Rayner
Shadow Comment
The shadow Secretary of State welcomed the Government’s focus on extremism but criticised the manner in which the policy was trailed, noting that leaks and controversy surrounding the appointment of an Islamophobia adviser were not appropriate. She questioned how the new definition would be applied practically, especially regarding its interaction with other public bodies like the police and universities. The shadow also raised concerns about the Government's delay in addressing this issue since 2011, and asked for details on online extremism measures and consultation processes with faith groups and local councils. Angela Rayner called for a new cross-Government counter-extremism strategy and urged action to rebuild community resilience and cohesion, highlighting the need for an updated hate crime action plan.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.