Counter-extremism review
The 2015 counter-extremism strategy sensibly defined extremism as vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values which had evolved over the centuries, including democracy, the rule of law, freedom of speech and religion. Many of these evolved as a result of religious and political dissenters, such as John Bunyan who endured 12 years in Bedford prison for refusing to cease open-air preaching – a practice then viewed by the established church and government as spreading misinformation.
Expanding the definition of extremism to include “spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories” sets the government up as the final arbiter of truth – and risks creating a sedition law penalising those who dissent from the official government line.  Repressive authoritarian states such as Belarus and Kazakhstan have extremism laws like this. They have no place in a free society where we debate ideas, both woke and non-woke, and decide them democratically. 
If the account given by Policy Exchange is accurate, then these Home Office proposals themselves potentially fall under the 2015 definition of extremism. 
Dr Martin Parsons
West Mersea, Essex