The conviction of the airline bomb plotters will have served as a shocking and salutary lesson to many. It reminds us that the threat from al-Qaidainspired terrorism remains substantial. It shows us how grateful we should be for the vigilance of the intelligence and police services, who disrupted this plot before it could cause a massive loss of life. And it underlines how far we have to go to tackle the misunderstanding, anger and hatred festering in our communities.
The government has been right to acknowledge that local communities have a major role to play in helping prevent radicalisation. The Preventing Violent Extremism agenda (known simply as Prevent) sought to support Muslim communities by encouraging moderate groups to disrupt harmful behaviour, challenge perverse ideologies and protect the vulnerable from radicalisation.
In many areas Prevent has encouraged important work, especially encouraging closer relationships between police and local authorities. There are some very good examples of projects engaging young Muslim men, promoting dialogue, working to "reclaim Islam" and building confidence and leadership skills. Yet while we know that extremism is less likely to flourish in resilient, confident communities, it remains questionable whether any kind of Prevent programmes would have stopped Abdulla Ahmed Ali, Assad Ali Sarwar or Tanvir Hussain plotting their atrocity.
As the New Local Government Network's recent report, Stronger Together, highlighted, we need a more sophisticated approach to preventing violent extremism. Our work found that some Muslim communities were simply refusing to participate as they felt the programme's targeting of Muslims implied an association with terrorism that was stigmatising, labelling a whole community as potential extremists.
If we are to be successful in tackling homegrown terrorism, then the involvement of the community it aims to support is crucial. While communities themselves must not shirk from action to tackle extremism in their midst, approaches to cohesion and preventing violent extremism must support one another, not exacerbate difference, stigmatise, or indeed fuel perceptions of victimhood or alienation.
This makes it so much harder to build trust on a local level and have the effective engagement that is crucial to success. Communication, debate and giving communities a voice is key. For instance, the convicted plotters made great play of using British foreign policy as a justification for their actions. Issues such as foreign policy, housing, immigration and employment continue to provoke feelings of grievance at a local level and provide a difficult challenge to many individual and community identities. Politicians and civil servants must face questions and criticisms head on, and build routes for communication and debate. This will go some way to rebuilding trust.
Moreover, if the government's approach to preventing violent extremism is to be seen to be fair and even-handed, it should also take account of the growing threat from the far right. In light of recent civil disturbances, I welcome the announcement that Prevent is no longer to be targeted solely at the Muslim community and that the funding should be used to bring communities together, break down misunderstandings and reduce tensions.
The bomb plot trial should bring the importance of this issue into focus. A fairer and more sophisticated approach to community cohesion will then mean there could be more trust and engagement at local level, with greater acceptance of proportionate police and intelligence approaches. Reassessing the approach to Prevent is key to this.