𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Yvette Cooper’s review into extremism “belongs in North Korea” because it attempts to crush criticism over two-tier policing, critics have declared.

Fury erupted over a leaked Home Office report stating the comments are an example of a “Right-wing extremist narrative” which is “leaking into mainstream debates”.

The major review of extremism also says grooming gangs – referred to as ‘alleged group-based sexual abuse’ – are an issue exploited by the far-right to stir hatred against Muslims.

And ministers were on Monday night accused of “downplaying” the threat posed by Islamist fanatics as the leaked report suggests ignoring ideology.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: “Yvette Cooper’s review is complete nonsense.

“It is not “extremist” or “far right” to comment on policing or to campaign against rape gangs. It’s called free speech.

“Whether you agree or not with what’s said, free speech is a fundamental right in this country.”

Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman said: “Want to stop Pakistani rape gangs, end two-tier policing, or bring an end to mass immigration?

“We’re “far right” now according to the Home Office. This nonsense belongs in North Korea, not Britain. It’s Orwellian and smears millions of decent people who are angry about how our country is being run.

“To Make Britain Great Again two-tier policing must be stopped, NCHIs must be scrapped and we need to be honest about Islamist extremism. We can’t go on like this.”

Former Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick added: “The officials that produced this factually incorrect garbage are unfit to serve the public. They should be fired.”

The Home Office’s so-called ‘Rapid Analytical Sprint’ of Government policy on extremism said it should take an “ideologically agnostic approach” and instead focus on “behaviours and activity of concern”.

Critics warned the move will swamp counter-terrorism police and MI5 with thousands more cases involving people not considered to be a national security threat.

The review also suggested the Government should expand extremism’s definition to cover environmental extremists, the far left, anarchists, conspiracy theorists, and others.

But ministers are set to continue with a focus on Islamist and far-right extremism. The Prime Minister said it was important to focus resources on the threats faced by the UK.

The Home Secretary is understood to disagree with the findings of the review.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer told broadcasters: “When it comes to extremism, it’s very important that we are focused on the threats so we can deploy our resources properly and therefore we’re looking carefully where the key challenges are.”

He added: “Obviously, that’s now informed with what I said last week in the aftermath of the Southport murders, where we’ve got the additional challenge, I think, of a cohort of loners who are extreme and they need to be factored in.”

Paul Stott and Andrew Gilligan, of Policy Exchange, said in an analysis of the report that the suggested approach risks swamping authorities with new cases.

“Some of the definitions of extremism also threaten free speech, defining aspects of normal and legitimate political debate as extremist,” they added.

The Conservatives branded moves to reverse the limit on non-crime hate incidents “extremely concerning”.

Shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith told GB News that the Home Secretary should publish the report “immediately” and claimed there was a “cell within the Home Office that is not concerned about ordinary crime, ordinary policing”.

After Axel Rudakubana, 18, pleaded guilty last week to murdering three girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class, Sir Keir said it was understandable that the public would look at the crime and “wonder what the word terrorism means”.

The Prime Minister said the teenager represented a new kind of threat, distinct from politically or ideologically motivated terrorism, with “acts of extreme violence perpetrated by loners, misfits, young men in their bedroom, accessing all manner of material online, desperate for notoriety”.

He said that, if needed, the Government would change the law to recognise the “new and dangerous threat” and “review our entire counter-extremist system to make sure we have what we need to defeat it”.