What is going on in the middle east. By the extremist islamist . No, what is going on in the middle east. | by the extremist islamist . No, they are hot by the extremist islamist . No, they are not. ,. , by the extremist islamist . No, they are not. ,. , � , by the extremist islamist . No, they arenot. ,. , k,. , are not. Does a sum of 5 lives snow sueakin are not. Does a sum of 5 lives snow speaking to are not. Does a sum of 5 lives snow speaking to the are not. Does a sum of 5 lives snow speaking to the bbcs are not. Does a sum of 5 lives snow speaking to the bbcs chris speaking to the bbcs Chris Warburton there. The new definition is part of the governments promised to tackle what it calls on increased threat since the attacks by hamas last october. The idea is to stop individuals or groups to have a platform to spread their views if they are extremist. The concern is that any definition could be seen as unfair or democratic undemocratic. With the details, heres our correspondent, damien dramatic is. The aftermath of the October 7th Attacks on israel, the government says, has been increasing concern about radicalisation here in this country. So its come up with this new definition of extremism, saying it means the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance that aims to negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, undermine the uks system of democracy and democratic rights, or intentionally create a permissive environment for others to do that. This month outside downing street, rishi sunak promised robust action. We will redouble our support for the prevent programme to stop young minds being poisoned by extremism. We will demand that universities stop Extremist Activity on campus. We will also act to prevent people entering this country whose aim is to undermine its values. This isnt a new legal standard, but his government will draw up a list of extremist groups. Islamists and neo nazis, it says, whose actions, while not illegal, are deemed threatening. Some conservatives worry it could impinge on ourfreedoms. Radical islamists pose a serious threat to our nations security. And i agree with my right honourable friend that we must urgently address this. But reports that the government wishes to broaden the definition of extremism are concerning because in separating the definition of extremism from actual violence and harm, we may criminalise people with a wide range of legitimate views and have a Chilling Effect on free speech. This is absolutely not about silencing those with private and peaceful beliefs, nor will it impact free speech. The government insists the bar will be high so individuals attending marches wont be named, religious beliefs and strongly held convictions will be unaffected. But it says groups seeking to organise events that aim to subvert democracy will be listed, denied official meetings and funding so they can be identified and marginalised. Critics say the government should be seeking a broad consensus, not deciding on its own what constitutes extremism. You are watching bbc news, where we are bringing you special coverage as we wait for the Communities Secretary, michael gove, to unveil the governments new definition of extremism in the house of commons. You can see live pictures there from the house. We understand the Communities Secretary has arrived, and he will be presenting the governments definition of extremism and taking questions from members of parliament. Still with us is our political correspondent, rob watson. And in damiens piece there, will concerns about the impact on Freedom Of Speech that this definition could have on Freedom Of Speech . find of speech that this definition could have on Freedom Of Speech . And we also heard in have on Freedom Of Speech . And we also heard in his have on Freedom Of Speech . And we also heard in his piece have on Freedom Of Speech . And we also heard in his piece the have on Freedom Of Speech . And we also heard in his piece the argument back from the prime minister, and no doubt we will hear michael gove make that in a minute, which is that you will have to remember the government will have to remember the government will argue that they are not changing the law, this is not going on the statute, so anything that it was ok to say before we change this definition is still going to be ok to say, provided whatever you want to say, provided whatever you want to say, provided whatever you want to say stays within existing uk laws about racial hatred, racial incitement, incitement to violence, all of the existing curbs that there are honest free speech, and in other words this doesnt add any new ones. More limited in the way government chooses to interact with individuals in the fight of damming against extremism and the sort of ideology that the government would considered to be anti british, maybe not anti british, but anti the things which are there in the definition. Things which are there in the definition. ~. ,. , definition. With that definition, the question definition. With that definition, the question is definition. With that definition, the question is how definition. With that definition, the question is how ministers l definition. With that definition, i the question is how ministers will decide who should be on this list. There are real questions about the process and what evidence will be used . ,. ,. ,. , used . You have read out the definition. Used . You have read out the definition. Im used . You have read out the definition. Im not used . You have read out the definition. Im not sure used . You have read out the definition. Im not sure if definition. Im not sure if the graphic is still up. I guess the government would say, right, all those people who are critical of the definition before we put it out there, what exactly are your problems with it because might the government would say, and it is argued that, look, it is pretty focused that you cant incite violence, you can seek to undermine britains Liberal Democracy and tolerance. As the saying goes, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, and when government officials, not politicians, not ministers, when they come to go through all of these potential groups or individuals who perhaps the government wants to put on a list that it wont deal with, how did they do it . What evidence for they use, and how easy will it be, if you like, to use this evidence to match against the definition that you are helpfully reading out earlier stop people say maybe it is a tricky task, maybe it wont be that tricky. As you heard again in damians speech, the bar will be set pretty high. An organisation or an individual will have to be pretty extreme, why not use the word, to make it onto the list. Again, michael gove pointed out earlier, just because a group makes it onto the list that the government wont deal with, the list that the government wont dealwith, it the list that the government wont deal with, it doesnt mean the group is banned. The group can carry on doing what it is doing, ijust dont get money or engagement with the government. Bud get money or engagement with the government government. And criticism of the governments government. And criticism of the governments new government. And criticism of the governments new definition government. And criticism of thej governments new definition also coming from within its own party, including three former Home Secretaries. Including three former Home Secretaries. , � ,. , secretaries. Yes, lets see what these three secretaries. Yes, lets see what these three former secretaries. Yes, lets see what these three former Home Secretaries. Yes, lets see what these three former Home Secretaries say that the definition is out there. I think the concerns that the three former Home Secretaries had was more the idea not so much over the definition, butjust the idea of the definition, butjust the idea of the government moving on this issue on such a sensitive, big, societal issue in a way that they felt was not as inclusive as it might have been, that it could have included opposition parties, could have included other groups in society. I think the government would say that since that letter was published, and since that letter was published, and since some of the contacts people have had with people who have expressed concerns, we will see whether the government has assuaged any of those concerns or whether the former Home Secretaries and others still have them. Part of the problem that the government faces, and we discussed as a minute ago, is that the general climate we are in at the moment in britain. We are in a fiercely partisan moment where threats of violence and extremism, rather than bringing britains parties together, theres been a lot of point scoring. We are not at the same place that we were in 2005, 2006 and 2007, where this whole idea of Counter Extremism Programmes first came into being. We of Counter Extremism Programmes first came into being. Of Counter Extremism Programmes first came into being. We ust need to let our viewers h first came into being. We ust need to let our viewers know first came into being. We just need to let our viewers know that first came into being. We just need to let our viewers know that there l to let our viewers know that there has been an update that there has been a delay to the statement by the Communities Secretary, michael gove stop he was due to address the house at about 11 30am, but there has been at about 11 30am, but there has been a delay. We are not sure why, but we will bring you that statement as soon as it happens. Rob, you were talking about the climate under which this new definition has been announced, particularly after hamass attacks on israel. We have heard from several muslim organisations who say they are worried that muslim communities or groups would be unfairly targeted by this definition. First groups would be unfairly targeted by this definition. This definition. First of all, apologies this definition. First of all, apologies to this definition. First of all, apologies to viewers this definition. First of all, j apologies to viewers being this definition. First of all, apologies to viewers being stuck with me rather than the Government Minister who came up with this policy we were hoping to hear him explain it, but we will no doubt get there. Muslim groups have said they are worried this will be seen to unfairly target muslims. They will say in terms of the actual, in terms of how Police Officers see it, the main threat of Domestic Violence does come from islamic extremists, so the challenge for the government is to recognise that and deal with that in a way that doesnt somehow seem like it is disproportionately affecting muslim groups. Again, the government would say, wait and see, lets see who gets on the group. If there are groups who feel they shouldnt be on the list of organisations that the government doesnt want to deal with, lets hear the kind of case that they make against their removal or the injustice of their inclusion. That is the dilemma that the government faces, and on the one hand, the counterterrorism authorities, the police and intelligence communities are not in any doubt that the biggest domestic threat does come from islamic extremists, ahead of growing threats from right wing extremists. How do you do that as a government in a way that looks like you are doesnt look like you are victimising groups or communities . That is of course a very difficult challenge. It is a challenge against a pretty frock atmosphere in british politics these last few months, so in a way it would obviously be a lot easier to deal with these kind of issues if we were in calmer times, but we are not. Issues if we were in calmer times, but we are not issues if we were in calmer times, but we are not. Thank you so much for explaining but we are not. Thank you so much for explaining all but we are not. Thank you so much for explaining all those but we are not. Thank you so much for explaining all those details but we are not. Thank you so much for explaining all those details to l for explaining all those details to us. We are going to give you a break now, because you have been with us for quite a while, but do stay with us as we wait for the Communities Secretary to speak to the house. Lets turn to colin blum, a former government adviser on faith matters. Thank you forjoining us on the programme. Thank you for oining us on the programme. Thank you for oining us on the rouramme. , ~ i. ,. , programme. Thank you for having me. What is your programme. Thank you for having me. What is your reaction programme. Thank you for having me. What is your reaction to programme. Thank you for having me. What is your reaction to the programme. Thank you for having me. What is your reaction to the new what is your reaction to the new definition . What is your reaction to the new definition . , , definition . And broadly supportive of it. I definition . And broadly supportive of it lthink definition . And broadly supportive of it. | think It Definition . And broadly supportive of it. | think it is definition . And broadly supportive of it. I think it is a definition . And broadly supportive of it. I think it is a bIt Definition . And broadly supportive of it. I think it is a bit late. Definition . And broadly supportive of it. I think it is a bit late. We of it. I think it is a bit late. We could have had at a number of years ago, and i was calling way back until 2019 that we needed to have an improved definition of extremism, and i think anything that makes up previous definition, which had a degree of looseness about it, anything that makes it tighter and a bit more concrete, that was a good thing. I think this is a step in the right direction. I dont think it is a quantum leap in the right direction. It certainly could go further. Largely, ithink direction. It certainly could go further. Largely, i think it is to be welcomed. Further. Largely, ithink it is to be welcomed. Further. Largely, ithink it is to be welcomed. You called for an u date be welcomed. You called for an update to be welcomed. You called for an update to the be welcomed. You called for an update to the definition be welcomed. You called for an update to the definition for be welcomed. You called for an i update to the definition for many years now. You say you hope the definition will go further. What you think are some of the challenges in British Society . What are you concerned British Society . What are you concerned. , � ,. , British Society . What are you concerned. , � ,. , concerned aboutlets say i have been a longstanding concerned aboutlets say i have been a longstanding critic concerned aboutlets say i have been a longstanding critic of concerned aboutlets say i have been a longstanding critic of weak a long standing critic of weak politicians. I want them to be stronger and bolder and more courageous in the way that they tackle extremism. We currently have a definition for terrorism, and proscribed terrorist organisations, they sit in one category, and there is nothing else below that. I think there are some very canny organisations, some very canny individuals that go right up to the limit of what they can say without being proscribed as terrorists, and then behave with impunity thereafter. I think there does need to be Something Like a proscription light, which isjust one notch below where proscribed terrorists are. But people who are fundamentally trying to undermine british values, and those values of liberty, democracy, peace and justice, and we are seeing lots of individuals and organisations that have been doing that. My specialism was in fifa engagement. I wrote a report that was published last year. One of the frustrations we have, because so much extremism is faith based or faith aligned, it was very difficult to pin some of these people dont. They were given a veneer of respectability. They had access to parliament, they had access to some Government Departments because the government was not clear enough in its own mind about. Government was not clear enough in its own mind about. Its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt you. Its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt you, but its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt you, but it its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt you, but it seems. Its own mind about. Sorry to interrupt you, but it seems to | its own mind about. Sorry to i interrupt you, but it seems to be that what you are calling for is essentially perhaps a change in the law, ratherthan essentially perhaps a change in the law, rather than an update to the definition is make this definition doesnt proscribe any kinds of crimes, so what you are calling for is a different piece of legislation Multi Definition of extremism . What multidefinition of extremism . What im sa in multidefinition of extremism . What lm saying is multidefinition of extremism . What lm saying is that multidefinition of extremism . What im saying is that the Multi Definition of extremism . Iisisgt im saying is that the announcement today, and i appreciate that the Secretary Of State is yet to speak in parliament, but the Announcement Todayis in parliament, but the announcement today is a step in the right direction, but it could go further, and i do call on the government and mr grove and mr sunak and others to be braver in tackling extremism where