But this mixes up advice and intelligence. Whether PA satisfies the tests in the Terrorism Act 2000 is both a legal judgement and not really something you need advice on, given how ludicrously widely drawn the tests are. And Intelligence does not tell you what “should” happen. So more sophistry.
As I’ve said before “disturbing information given to me that covered ideas and planning for future attacks” is just using pejorative language to make things sound bad
And “the unanimous recommendation to ministers from the cross-government security expert review group” looks like more sleight of hand, appearing again to deliberately conflate the issue of meeting the threshold for proscription with actually recommending it.