Category: Blog

Strongbow Engages Engineering Firms for Water Treatment Plant Design at the South Crofty Tin…

Brian Sanchez

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA–(Marketwired – Jun 6, 2017) – Strongbow Exploration Inc. (TSX VENTURE:SBW), (“Strongbow”
or the “Company”) is pleased to announce that Siltbuster Process Solutions Ltd. (“SPS”) and Nomenca Ltd. (“Nomenca”)
have been engaged to undertake Process Specification and Outline Design Works for a water treatment plant at Strongbow’s South
Crofty project located in Cornwall, UK. Strongbow successfully completed water treatment trials in
March 2017 and subsequently has submitted an application to the Environment Agency for a mine water discharge permit. Upon
receipt of the water discharge permit, the project will be fully permitted.

The water treatment plant will be designed to treat 25,000 cubic metres of mine water per day and enable dewatering of the
mine workings in the South Crofty project area.

Richard Williams, the Company’s CEO, commented:

“This is an important step in the development of our South Crofty project and will enable Strongbow to begin
construction of the water treatment plant, subject to financing, as soon as we receive the discharge permit from the Environment
Agency. The Company expects to receive the discharge permit later this year, and commence dewatering of the mine in the first
half of 2018, as planned.”

SPS, based in Monmouthshire, UK, was responsible for overseeing the recent successful water treatment trials at South Crofty.
SPS has extensive experience in the design, construction and operation of mine water treatment plants, including plants at Wheal
Jane, Hemerdon, Dawdon (all in the UK) and Strieborná in Slovakia. SPS will be responsible for providing the process
specifications for the plant and the outline design. They will also provide technical support during the detailed engineering and
construction phases and be responsible for commissioning the plant.

Nomenca, based in St. Austell, UK is a subsidiary of North Midland Construction Plc and operates in a variety of industries as
a specialist Mechanical, Electrical, Instrumentation, Control and Automation (MEICA) Contractor providing consultancy services,
design and construction, operation and maintenance of assets. Nomenca has extensive experience in both the mining and water
treatment sectors having undertaken multiple projects for Imerys, Wolf Minerals and South West Water. Nomenca will initially be
undertaking target costing and outline design works for the treatment plant, which is expected to lead into the detailed
engineering and construction phases.

About South Crofty

The South Crofty project includes a past-producing underground tin mine located in Cornwall, UK. Mining in the area dates back
approximately 400 years. Mining at South Crofty ceased in 1998, following 13 years of sustained low metal prices. The South
Crofty project has a valid mine permit (until 2071) with surface and underground planning permissions.

Strongbow acquired South Crofty in July 2016 and has since published a NI 43-101 mineral resource estimate, see report for details,
and a Preliminary Economic Assessment (“PEA”)
on February 16, 2017. The mine is presently flooded but recent water treatment trials have demonstrated that the water can be
successfully treated to a quality sufficient to permit safe dewatering of the mine. A water discharge permit application was
lodged with the Environment Agency in April 2017 and is expected to be awarded in September 2017, which should enable mine
dewatering to commence in Q2 2018.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Richard D. Williams, P.Geo

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX
Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

This news release contains “forward-looking statements” including but not limited to statements with respect to
Strongbow’s ability and the timing to obtain an increase to the water discharge permit for the South Crofty tin project, the
estimated time required to complete mine dewatering, the design and treatment capabilities of the proposed water treatment plant
and technical assumptions included in the PEA.

No assurances can be given that mining of the South Crofty project will be technically or economically viable. Such
estimates are expressions of judgment based on knowledge, mining experience, analysis of drilling results and industry practises.
Valid estimates made at any given time may significantly change when new information becomes available. While the Company
believes that the resource estimates included in the NI 43-101 technical report prepared for the South Crofty project are well
established, by their very nature, resource estimates are imprecise and depend, to a certain extent, upon statistical inferences
which may ultimately prove unreliable. If such estimates are inaccurate or are reduced in the future, this could have a material
adverse impact on the Company.

Forward-looking statements, while based on management’s best estimates and assumptions, are subject to risks and
uncertainties that may cause actual results to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking
statements, including but not limited to: risks related to receipt of regulatory approvals, the successful integration of
acquisitions; risks related to general economic and market conditions; risks related to the availability of financing; the timing
and content of upcoming work programs; actual results of proposed exploration activities; possible variations in Mineral
Resources or grade; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes, title
disputes, claims and limitations on insurance coverage and other risks of the mining industry; changes in national and local
government regulation of mining operations, tax rules and regulations.

Although Strongbow has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those contained in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated
or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could
differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on
forward-looking statements. Strongbow undertakes no obligation or responsibility to update forward-looking statements, except as
required by law.

Go to Source

GST anti-profiteering clause: Firms found guilty could be asked to deposit amount in consumer fund, says Hasmukh Adhia

Brian Sanchez
anti-profiteering authority, revenue secretary, Hasmukh Adhia, gst rollout, gst rates, consumer welfare fund, section 57 of the Central GST Act, anti-profiteering clause, new indirect tax regime, gst Speaking at an event organised by The Indian Express, Hasmukh Adhia added that clear rules and framework under the anti-profiteering clause was work under progress. (Reuters)

Although the final shape of the anti-profiteering authority and its functioning is still not clear, revenue secretary Hasmukh Adhia said that it may involve the guilty entity depositing the amount made through profiteering into the consumer welfare fund, a provision for which is made under section 57 of the Central GST Act. Speaking at an event organised by The Indian Express, he added that clear rules and framework under the anti-profiteering clause was work under progress. “There are companies that are oligopolies with a huge market share in a particular product which has seen a reduction in tax incidence under GST. Now if these companies don’t pass on the benefit to the consumers then we can ask them to reduce their prices, However, if they don’t do it, we can also ask them to despots the entire amount amassed through profiteering into the consumer welfare fund,” Adhia said.

The anti-profiteering clause has been provided for in the GST Act to ensure that companies or manufacturers who fail to pass on the benefit of lower tax incidence to the consumer post July 1 are penalised. This has received severe criticism from several quarters on the fear that the clause could be used as a tool for harassment of taxpayers. The government has, however, countered it saying that the law would be required in rare cases as market-based competition would ensure commodity prices are reduced in proportion to tax cut in most cases.

Separately, Adhia said that the government needed to ensure that consumers are made aware of reduced tax incidence on many supplies including works contract. This awareness was needed to that the builders don’t extract any additional capital from home buyers. “For works contract, currently the tax incidence is 6% compared to 12% under GST. However, in the new regime input credit will be available for all the raw materials including cement, steel, aluminium, glass, paint, ceramics and tiles. Since most of these items are in the 28% tax slab, a builder which procures them with proper bill will have nearly zero output tax liability,” Adhia explained.

Also Watch:
[embedded content]
The cost of some of the inputs for work contracts, including steel, will be lower under the new regime, as the government has proposed a GST rate of 5 per cent for coal (which is used in making steel and some other products), much lower than the current effective tax incidence of 11.5 per cent, said analysts. The GST regime will reduce the cash component of the construction economy, because, to avail of ITC, the raw materials have to be sourced from GST-registered vendors. This will lead to greater tax compliance.

Go to Source

Global forces driving law firms

Brian Sanchez

Global factors, and not just the attractions of the Australian marketplace, helped drive two big international law firms to establish practices in this country.

Both firms, Hogan Lovells and White & Case, entered the Australian market by recruiting leading partners from Australian firms.

But the business plans of both firms are firmly focused on cross-border work. “I think the key word is ‘cross-border’,” said Tim Lester, the co-managing partner for Australia at Hogan Lovells.

“The underlying rationale for us being here is to chase down, win and support cross-border work coming through to Australia from the network” of Hogan Lovells practices around the world, Mr Lester said.

At White & Case, “it was an Asia-Pacific strategy” as much as a purely Australian play, said John Tivey, the firm’s global head of mining and metals.

Both firms outlined their strategic thinking during a series of roundtable discussion with leading players in the market for legal services. Those discussions were filmed before a live audience at the News Corp Theatre in Sydney as part of The Australian’s Legal Week initiative, which includes the The Australian Legal Review magazine.

The magazine, which was published on Friday and is still available online, features an article by former chief justice Robert French on the challenges confronting the legal sector.

An extended video of the first roundtable discussion is available on The Australian’s website and two more will be published online in coming weeks.

In an extract that appears online today, Mr Tivey says White & Case was interested in growing its Asia-Pacific projects practice but only opened for business in this country after identifying “a quality team” that could be recruited. “We saw a great opportunity with the team that we recruited — in the sense that they were the leading team in the market,” Mr Tivey said.


Go to Source

Internet firms vow to keep working to remove terrorist content

Brian Sanchez

Internet companies have reiterated their commitment to help combat online extremism after Theresa May accused big tech firms of giving terrorist ideology “the safe space it needs to breed”.

The prime minister levied the criticism as she reacted to the London terror attack and called for more to be done “to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning”.

Mrs May said: “We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed”.

She added: “Yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide.

In response,Facebook said it condemned recent attacks and wanted the social media platform to be “a hostile environment for terrorists”.

In a statement, Simon Milner, director of policy at Facebook, said: “Using a combination of technology and human review, we work aggressively to remove terrorist content from our platform.

“As soon as we become aware of it – and if we become aware of an emergency involving imminent harm to someone’s safety, we notify law enforcement.”

Nick Pickles, UK head of public policy at Twitter, said: “Terrorist content has no place on Twitter.

“We continue to expand the use of technology as part of a systematic approach to removing this type of content.

“We will never stop working to stay one step ahead and will continue to engage with our partners across industry, government, civil society and academia.”

Twitter also says it shut down 376,890 accounts linked to terrorism in the last six months of 2016.

Meanwhile, a Google spokesman said: “We are committed to working in partnership with the Government and NGOs to tackle these challenging and complex problems, and share the Government’s commitment to ensuring terrorists do not have a voice online.

“We employ thousands of people and invest hundreds of millions of pounds to fight abuse on our platforms and ensure we are part of the solution to addressing these challenges.”

The Tory manifesto has also called for a much tougher approach to regulation on the internet.

Proposals include tougher sanctions for companies that fail to remove illegal content, as well as legislating for an industry-wide levy on social media companies to counter harmful activity online.

Digital campaigners the Open Rights Group said it was disappointing Mrs May had focused on internet regulation and encryption in the aftermath of the London Bridge attack.

“This could be a very risky approach. If successful, Theresa May could push these vile networks into even darker corners of the web, where they will be even harder to observe.

“But we should not be distracted: the internet and companies like Facebook are not a cause of this hatred and violence, but tools that can be abused.

“While governments and companies should take sensible measures to stop abuse, attempts to control the internet is not the simple solution that Theresa May is claiming.”

Professor Peter Neumann, director of the International Centre For The Study Of Radicalisation at King’s College London, said:

“Few people radicalised exclusively online. Blaming social media platforms is politically convenient but intellectually lazy.

“In other words, May’s statement may have sounded strong but contained very little that is actionable, different, or new.”

Go to Source

Queensland mining firms face $2m black lung claim

Brian Sanchez

A former coal miner diagnosed with black lung disease has filed a $2 million damages claim against a group of Queensland mining companies.

Jason Bing, 46, spent 13 years working in various mines across the state and is one of at least 21 coal workers who’ve been diagnosed with a disease, caused by inhaling coal dust and once believed to have been eradicated in Australia.

Shine Lawyers on Monday filed a claim against 16 mining companies that own or operate the mostly underground sites where Mr Bing worked.

They include subsidiaries of Anglo American Coal, BHP Billiton, Glencore Coal Queensland, Peabody Energy Australia and Oaky Creek Coal.

The law suit alleges mine owners and operators did not provide a safe work environment and that personal protective equipment was inadequate.

It also alleges ventilation systems at the mostly underground sites where Mr Bing worked failed to prevent a dangerous build-up of coal dust.

The $2 million includes claims for lost income, lost earning capacity and psychological trauma.

Roger Singh, from Shine Lawyers, believes it’s the first such action filed in the Supreme Court, and says it’s about achieving justice for a sick man.

“He’s been unable to work, his quality of life is deteriorating as this terrible disease takes hold and he’s lost his career and his home,” Mr Singh said in a statement.

Mr Bing worked at the coal mines under various labour hire arrangements.

AAP

Go to Source

Qld mining firms face $2m black lung claim

Brian Sanchez
At the coalface. Photo from australianmining.com.au

At the coalface. Photo from australianmining.com.au

A former coal miner diagnosed with black lung disease has filed a $2 million damages claim against a group of Queensland mining companies.

Jason Bing, 46, spent 13 years working in various mines across the state and is one of at least 21 coal workers who’ve been diagnosed with a disease, caused by inhaling coal dust and once believed to have been eradicated in Australia.

Shine Lawyers on Monday filed a claim against 16 mining companies that own or operate the mostly underground sites where Mr Bing worked.

They include subsidiaries of Anglo American Coal, BHP Billiton, Glencore Coal Queensland, Peabody Energy Australia and Oaky Creek Coal.

The law suit alleges mine owners and operators did not provide a safe work environment and that personal protective equipment was inadequate.

It also alleges ventilation systems at the mostly underground sites where Mr Bing worked failed to prevent a dangerous build up of coal dust.

The $2 million includes claims for lost income, lost earning capacity and psychological trauma.

Roger Singh, from Shine Lawyers, believes it’s the first such action filed in the Supreme Court, and says it’s about achieving justice for a sick man.

‘He’s been unable to work, his quality of life is deteriorating as this terrible disease takes hold and he’s lost his career and his home,’ Mr Singh said in a statement.

Mr Bing worked at the coal mines under various labour hire arrangements.

Tags:

Go to Source

Hertz Global Holdings Inc : Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims On Behalf of Investors of Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. – HTZ

Brian Sanchez

NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / June 5, 2017 / Pomerantz LLP is investigating claims on behalf of investors of Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. (“Hertz” or the “Company”) (NYSE: HTZ). Such investors are advised to contact Robert S. Willoughby at [email protected] or 888-476-6529, ext. 9980.

The investigation concerns whether Hertz and certain of its officers and/or directors have breached their fiduciary duties.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, San Diego, and Florida, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

SOURCE: Pomerantz LLP


Go to Source

Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims On Behalf of Investors of Herbalife Ltd. – HLF

Brian Sanchez

NEW YORK, June 5, 2017 /PRNewswire/ — Pomerantz LLP is investigating claims on behalf of investors of Herbalife Ltd. (“Herbalife” or the “Company”) (NYSE: HLF). Such investors are advised to contact Robert S. Willoughby at [email protected] or 888-476-6529, ext. 9980.

The investigation concerns whether Herbalife and certain of its officers and/or directors have engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices.

[Click here to join a class action]

On June 5, 2017, Herbalife announced that it was lowering its sales guidance, advising investors that new Federal Trade Commission regulations will have a great impact than expected on the Company’s sales. In addition, multiple news outlets have reported that Mark Friedman, the Herbalife executive involved in a 2016 settlement with U.S. regulators pursuant to which Herbalife agreed to pay $200 million to settle charges of deceiving customers, has stepped down from his position as general counsel.

On this news, Herbalife’s share price fell $4.93, or 6.67%, to close at $68.99 on June 5, 2017.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and Los Angeles, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com

CONTACT:
Robert S. Willoughby
Pomerantz LLP
[email protected]

To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shareholder-alert-pomerantz-law-firm-investigates-claims-on-behalf-of-investors-of-herbalife-ltd–hlf-300468965.html

SOURCE Pomerantz LLP


Go to Source

Perverse Law in 9 States Enriches Donors to Private Schools: Trump Could Be on the Verge of Taking It National

Brian Sanchez

Photo Credit: http://www.aasa.org

The Trump administration’s push to privatize public education not only seeks to deprive traditional K-12 schools of billions in federal aid, but may greatly expand existing tax loopholes that already allow wealthy people and firms to make money on donating to private schools.

The proposed Education Opportunities Act would “put two new federal voucher tax shelters within reach for many more Americans and lead to an explosion in funding for private schools,” a joint release from the School Superintendents Association (ASSA) and Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) said. “It would also keep in place an existing federal loophole that permits savvy taxpayers to benefit from certain ‘double-dipping’ practices, where they receive a federal deduction and state tax credit on the same donation to a private school.”   

An accompanying ASSA-ITEP report, “Public Loss, Private Gain: How School Voucher Tax Shelters Undermine Public Education,” contains stunning examples of how private schools already offer major tax benefits to donors unlike anything in the public school universe. Should they be expanded, it’s possible that funding sources for traditional K-12 schools would shrink even more than they have in recent years, the report predicted.

“Although proponents maintain that tuition tax credits do not involve public money, in reality these credits are a roundabout way of providing public funding to private schools,” the report said. “Instead of directly funding private school scholarships, the government reimburses wealthy taxpayers (with tax credits and deductions) in return for providing funding to private schools on the state’s behalf. The end result is the same as under a direct voucher program: a boost in resources for private schools and a reduction in resources for public education.”

Private schools already advertise the double-dipping benefits for individuals and corporations. Here are some examples from the ASSA-ITEP report: 

A K-12 private school in Georgia, the Wood Acres School, has a webpage promoting the Georgia tuition tax credit program. On the website, they write that donors can “profit up to 29% on the amount donated.” 

A wealth-management firm in Virginia, Marotta Wealth Management, describes to clients how a donation to the Virginia tuition tax credit program allows taxpayers to “offset the cost of those gifts through tax credits and the avoidance of capital gains taxes.” Using an example of a taxpayer donating stock worth $10,000, Marotta states that “their total [tax] savings amounts to $10,960.60 or 9.60% more than their original donation.”  

An accountant with True Wealth Management in Atlanta, Georgia states that “we anticipate taxpayers will exhaust this allocation [of available state tax credits] within the first day. We advise taking advantage of pre-registration NOW by reserving your spot online.” He goes on to explain that, “If you are a taxpayer stuck in Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), this charitable contribution can make you money! That’s right, AMT filers are ahead by 28% on these contributions.” 

For the past three congressional sessions, Sen. Marco  Rubio, R-FL, and Rep. Todd Rokita, R-IN, have introduced the Educational Opportunities Act (EOA). It would create a federal tuition tax credit program that expands what is now offered to high-income taxpayers in nine of the 17 states that offer voucher tax credits. “Both legislators hail from states with broad tuition tax credit programs and would like to see a replication of these programs at the federal level with the goal of having their legislation incorporated into a broader tax reform bill if it cannot pass by itself,” the AASA-ITEP report said.

Drilling into the proposal’s specifics, what emerges is what has become typical for the Trump administration and current GOP-majority Congress: vastly disparate and unequal treatment for traditional safety net programs and preferential treatment for their private sector corollary. This is seen in the proposed legislation by the size of the tax credit offered to private school donors.

“By granting a dollar-for-dollar credit, the EOA privileges voucher nonprofits over virtually every type of charity or nonprofit including homeless shelters, veterans’ support organizations, nonprofits serving victims of domestic violence, etc.,” the report said. “When taxpayers donate to most tax-exempt charities they receive a federal tax deduction that could be worth between 10 and 40 cents on each dollar donated. This is a generous tax incentive designed to encourage charitable giving. In contrast, the EOA posits that SGOs [scholarship granting organizations or private schools], are deserving of a far more lucrative benefit: a 100% tax credit on each dollar donated (up to the maximum eligible amounts identified above). If a taxpayer donates one dollar to a SGO, they do not just receive 10–40 cents back, but rather they receive a full dollar back. In effect, this bill provides SGOs with a tax advantage that is many times more generous than what is afforded to other charities.”

The potential impact of such a revenue shift is alarming to the national superintendents’ association with 13,000 members across the country. As has been widely reported, charter schools and private schools have more selective admissions, which in practice, can end up producing more segregated schools and schools that shun special needs students.

“Private schools subsidized via tuition tax credits can reject students who are performing below grade-level, or who have had trouble learning English, or who have a disability,” the report said. “There are few states that prohibit a private school from denying a student admission because of their religion or because they, or members of their family may be gay.”

The private schools can also pay their staff commissions for landing large contributions, a form of self-dealing that is not found in traditional public schools.

“SGOs are also allowed to keep 10% of the funds they receive for administrative costs,” the report said. “For a SGO that receives millions of dollars in donations this 10% administrative set-aside  could prove to be quite a windfall. In Arizona, for example, the Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization received almost $73 million in donations from 2010–2014. Using that money, they paid their executive director (who also happens to be the State Senate President) an annual salary of $125,000 and then paid him a further $52,000 to rent office space that he owns, and another $636,000 to his for-profit company for processing donations and applications.”

This kind of self-dealing would be permissible nationwide under the EOA—on top of 10 percent or more that private school donors can make on giving big money to these schools.

Go to Source

Tech firms facing more pressure after London terror attack

Brian Sanchez

Technology giants, under intense pressure after the British Prime Minister, accused them of providing a “safe space” for terrorist ideology, on Monday defended their handling of extremist content following the London terror attack.

Speaking outside Downing Street on Sunday, Prime Minister Theresa May said: “We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed.

“Yet that is precisely what the internet and the big companies provide,” she said.

Her terse statement came after three Islamist men carried out a knife and van attack in central London, killing at least seven people and injuring 48 others. The Islamic State terror group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

British Culture Secretary Karen Bradley said tech companies needed to tackle extremist content, in a similar way to how they had removed indecent images of children.

“We know it can be done and we know the internet companies want to do it,” she told the BBC.

Islamism-inspired terrorism remains the principal terrorist threat to both the United Kingdom and British interests overseas, a report that studied terror-related convictions in the country had said in March.

The study by the Henry Jackson Society had warned that Half of Britain’s jihadists are now radicalised online.

Amidst intensifying pressure, Google said it had already spent hundreds of millions of pounds on tackling the problem of extremist content online.

Facebook and Twitter said they were working hard to rid their networks of terrorist activity and support.

Google, which owns Youtube, along with Facebook, which owns WhatsApp, and Twitter were among the tech companies already facing pressure to tackle extremist content.

Google said it had invested heavily to fight abuse on its platforms and was already working on an “international forum to accelerate and strengthen our existing work in this area”.

Google added that it shared “the government’s commitment to ensuring terrorists do not have a voice online”.

Facebook said: “Using a combination of technology and human review, we work aggressively to remove terrorist content from our platform as soon as we become aware of it – and if we become aware of an emergency involving imminent harm to someone’s safety, we notify law enforcement.”

Meanwhile, Twitter said “terrorist content has no place on” its platform.

Home Secretary Amber Rudd said yesterday that tech firms needed to take down extremist content and limit the amount of end-to-end encryption that terrorists can use.

End-to-end encryption renders messages unreadable if they are intercepted, for example by criminals or law enforcement.

The Open Rights Group, which campaigns for privacy and free speech online, warned that politicians risked pushing terrorists’ “vile networks” into the “darker corners of the web” by more regulation.

The way that supporters of jihadist groups use social media has changed “despite what the prime minister says”, according to Dr. Shiraz Maher of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (ICSR) at King’s College London.

They have “moved to more clandestine methods”, with encrypted messaging app Telegram the primary platform, Dr. Maher said.

Dr. Julia Rushchenko, a London-based research fellow at the Henry Jackson Centre for Radicalisation and Terrorism, said that more could be done by tech giants to root out such content.

She felt that the companies erred on the side of privacy, not security. “We all know that social media companies have been a very helpful tool for hate preachers and for extremists,” Dr. Rushchenko said.

Simon Howard, Chief Executive of UKSIF, the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association, said: “We’ll need all the technology companies to do a bit more and we’ll have to decide what the UK legal framework in which they do that is.

Go to Source