Michael Gove has urged pro-Palestinian protesters to question whether extremist groups are behind some of the demonstrations – days ahead of publishing a new official definition of extremism.
The housing secretary said “good-hearted people” attending the marches should be aware they could be “lending credence” to extremists.
Tens of thousands of people participated in a Gaza protest organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) on Sunday in London – the fifth march in the capital this year – which saw five arrests and a counter-demonstrator de-arrested.
While marching through central London, protesters chanted “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and waved banners demanding a “ceasefire now”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:42
Charlotte Church joins pro-Palestine march
Mr Gove condemned the chant saying it called for the “erasure” of Israel and could fuel hate, in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph.
He said the upcoming revised definition of extremist groups would help protesters decide whether to attend future pro-Palestine events.
In the interview, he said: “If we’re clear about the nature of extremist organisations, then I think that means that some of the people – and there are good-hearted people who go on these marches, I don’t agree with them, but they’re moved by suffering and they want peace – but it may help some of them to question who are organising some of these events.”
More on Gaza
Related Topics:
The minister said some of the events had been “organised by extremist organisations” but would not elaborate just yet.
He continued: “That doesn’t mean that people who have gone on them are extremist, quite the opposite.
Advertisement
“But it means that you can begin to question: do you really want to be lending credence to this organisation? If you do, fair enough. But now there is no excuse for ignorance.”
The controversial chant of “from the river to the sea” – a reference to a Palestinian state stretching from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean – has drawn anger from some pro-Israel supporters, who argue the phrase calls for the eradication of the Israeli state.
Some pro-Palestinian supporters reject this, saying it is simply expressing the need for equality for all inhabitants of historic Palestine.
Image: Michael Gove. Pic: PA
Mr Gove said: “We can also have a broader conversation about the way in which some of what’s said on these marches springs from an extremist ideology, rather than simply being an expression of passionate opposition to conflict.
“‘From the river to the sea’ is not a call for peace… when you’re saying ‘from the river to the sea’, you’re explicitly saying: ‘I want to see the end of Israel as a Jewish state, the Jewish homeland erased’.
“Be clear about the fact that you know a key Islamist demand is the erasure of what they see as the ‘Zionist entity’ or the ‘crusader Zionist state’.
“And therefore, let’s be clear that there is a difference between a cry for peace and the legitimisation of an extremist position which intimidates and leads to hate.”
The existing definition of extremism features in the government’s Prevent counter-radicalisation programme, which aims to stop vulnerable people from being drawn into extremism.
It’s defined as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”.
The new definition will receive “more specificity”, and will enable the government and other public bodies to ban funding and engagement with Islamist and far-right groups.
Groups including the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), and Palestine Action – the organisation behind the recent defacing of Lord Balfour’s portrait at the University of Cambridge – could reportedly fall under the new extremist definition.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:22
Balfour painting slashed in Gaza protest
In a pre-emptive statement, Zara Mohammed of the MCB said suggesting the group would be identified “under arbitrary definitions of extremism is offensive, ludicrous and dangerous”.
“Tackling extremism is a serious issue that requires serious leadership from us all. Weaponising extremism for divisive electoral gain is dangerous and we must all see through it,” she added.
Mr Gove sought to address fears from some Conservatives that the new definition could encompass gender-critical feminists or devout religious groups.
“It’s only extremism if you translate that into a political ideology that is anti-democratic,” he said.
“Private belief should be cherished. Free speech has to be protected.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Mr Gove hinted that foreign governments such as Iran could be behind some of the extremist groups operating in the UK.
“One of the things that we’re explicitly looking at is the way in which foreign state and non-state actors seek to encourage extremism here,” he said.
“And again, this is inevitably sensitive work about which I can say only a very limited amount because it’s not only Iran that attempts to use some of these forces to destabilise British democracy.”
Meanwhile, The Observer reports there are fears within the government that the new definition could face a legal challenge.
“The government wants to launch this without a public consultation on the definition, or proper engagement with faith leaders,” one official, who claims to have seen the proposals, told the newspaper.
Her comments followed the departure of the prince and several others from the organisation in March.
They had asked her to step down, alleging it was in the “best interest of the charity”.
Dr Chandauka told Sky News that Harry had “authorised the release of a damaging piece of news to the outside world” without informing her or Sentebale directors.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to offer any formal response.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:43
Why was Prince Harry accused of ‘bullying’?
‘Strong perception of ill-treatment’
The Charity Commission said it was reporting after a “damaging internal dispute emerged” and has “criticised all parties to the dispute for allowing it to play out publicly”.
That “severely impacted the charity’s reputation and risked undermining public trust in charities more generally”, it said.
But it found no evidence of “widespread or systemic bullying or harassment, including misogyny or misogynoir at the charity”.
Nevertheless, it did acknowledge the “strong perception of ill-treatment felt by a number of parties to the dispute and the impact this may have had on them personally”.
It also found no evidence of “‘over-reach’ by either the chair or the Duke of Sussex as patron”.
‘Confusion exacerbated tensions’
But it was critical of the charity’s “lack of clarity in delegations to the chair which allowed for misunderstandings to occur”.
And it has “identified a lack of clarity around role descriptions and internal policies as the primary cause for weaknesses in the charity’s management”.
That “confusion exacerbated tensions, which culminated in a dispute and multiple resignations of trustees and both founding patrons”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:43
Why was Prince Harry accused of ‘bullying’?
Harry: Report falls troublingly short
A spokesperson for Prince Harry said it was “unsurprising” that the commission had announced “no findings of wrongdoing in relation to Sentebale’s co-founder and former patron, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex”.
They added: “Despite all that, their report falls troublingly short in many regards, primarily the fact that the consequences of the current chair’s actions will not be borne by her, but by the children who rely on Sentebale’s support.”
They said the prince will “now focus on finding new ways to continue supporting the children of Lesotho and Botswana”.
Dr Chandauka said: “I appreciate the Charity Commission for its conclusions which confirm the governance concerns I raised privately in February 2025.”
But she added: “The unexpected adverse media campaign that was launched by those who resigned on 24 March 2025 has caused incalculable damage and offers a glimpse of the unacceptable behaviours displayed in private.”
All police forces investigating grooming gangs in England and Wales will be given access to new AI tools to help speed up their investigations.
The artificial intelligence tools are already thought to have saved officers in 13 forces more than £20m and 16,000 hours of investigation time.
The apps can translate large amounts of text in foreign languages from mobile phones seized by police, and analyse a mass of digital data to find patterns and relationships between suspects.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:00
Grooming gang inquiry: ‘Our chance for justice’
‘We must punish perpetrators’
The rollout is part of a £426,000 boost for the Tackling Organised Exploitation (TOEX) programme, which supports officers to investigate complex cases involving modern slavery, county lines and child sex abuse.
“The sexual exploitation of children by grooming gangs is one of the most horrific crimes, and we must punish perpetrators, provide justice for victims and survivors, and protect today’s children from harm,” said safeguarding minister Jess Phillips.
“Baroness Casey flagged the need to upgrade police information systems to improve investigations and safeguard children at risk. Today we are investing in these critical tools.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:36
Key takeaways from the Casey review
Lack of ethnicity data ‘a major failing’
Police forces have also been instructed by the home secretary to collect ethnicity data, as recommended by Baroness Casey.
Her June report found the lack of data showing sex offenders’ ethnicity and nationality in grooming gangs was “a major failing over the last decade or more”.
She found that officials avoided the issue of ethnicity for fear of being called racist, but there were enough convictions of Asian men “to have warranted closer examination”.
The government has launched a national inquiry into the abuse and further details are expected to be announced in the coming weeks.
Rachel Reeves will need to find more than £40bn of tax rises or spending cuts in the autumn budget to meet her fiscal rules, a leading research institute has warned.
The National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) said the government would miss its rule, which stipulates that day to day spending should be covered by tax receipts, by £41.2bn in the fiscal year 2029-30.
In its latest UK economic outlook, NIESR said: “This shortfall significantly increases the pressure on the chancellor to introduce substantial tax rises in the upcoming autumn budget if she hopes to remain compliant with her fiscal rules.”
The deteriorating fiscal picture was blamed on poor economic growth, higher than expected borrowing and a reversal in welfare cuts that could have saved the government £6.25bn.
Together they have created an “impossible trilemma”, NIESR said, with the chancellor simultaneously bound to her fiscal rules, spending commitments, and manifesto pledges that oppose tax hikes.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:56
Could the rich be taxed to fill black hole?
Reeves told to consider replacing council tax
The institute urged the government to build a larger fiscal buffer through moderate but sustained tax rises.
“This will help allay bond market fears about fiscal sustainability, which may in turn reduce borrowing costs,” it said.
“It will also help to reduce policy uncertainty, which can hit both business and consumer confidence.”
It said that money could be raised by reforms to council tax bands or, in a more radical approach, by replacing the whole council tax system with a land value tax.
To reduce spending pressures, NIESR called for a greater focus on reducing economic inactivity, which could bring down welfare spending.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:40
What’s the deal with wealth taxes?
Growth to remain sluggish
The report was released against the backdrop of poor growth, with the chancellor struggling to ignite the economy after two months of declining GDP.
The institute is forecasting modest economic growth of 1.3% in 2025 and 1.2% in 2026. That means Britain will rank mid-table among the G7 group of advanced economies.
‘Things are not looking good’
However, inflation is likely to remain persistent, with the consumer price index (CPI) likely to hit 3.5% in 2025 and around 3% by mid-2026. NIESR blamed sustained wage growth and higher government spending.
It said the Bank of England would cut interest rates twice this year and again at the beginning of next year, taking the rate from 4.25% to 3.5%.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Persistent inflation is also weighing on living standards: the poorest 10% of UK households saw their living standards fall by 1.3% in 2024-25 compared to the previous year, NIESR said. They are now 10% worse off than they were before the pandemic.
Professor Stephen Millard, deputy director for macroeconomics at NIESR, said the government faced tough choices ahead: “With growth at only 1.3% and inflation above target, things are not looking good for the chancellor, who will need to either raise taxes or reduce spending or both in the October budget.”