Member

I am sure there are Members who will speak against this, but I ask them to consider the views of the overwhelming majority of the public. They might not agree that economic damage—it is primarily economic damage but let us not forget that there are incredibly serious cases going through the courts at the moment involving the use of a sledgehammer to cause harm to a police officer—meets the definition of terrorism. It has not always. It does not necessarily meet people’s common perception of what a terrorist organisation does, which is focused largely on violent actions against individuals. However, I think there would be overwhelming support for saying that an organisation that is dedicated to breaking the law to get its way, even if it is not designated as terrorist, should not be free to advertise, recruit or livestream its crimes on social media. I put it to the Government that this is a genuinely common-sense measure, so that the next time that this occurs—and this will happen again—it gives them a tool to nip the activities in the bud and avoid the controversy which has been a feature of having so many people unnecessarily clogging up police time and the courts by making a protest against the terrorist designation.