Theresa May has suppressed a report the government commissioned on where extremist funding is coming from. It's widely believed that this is because it traces it back to Saudi, and we have huge arms sales contracts with them. I do think money is key - people are being radicalised in new Mosques, which are believed to be traceable to Saudi money.
She's said that "enough is enough" and things must change, which is a bit odd, given she has been Home Secretary and Prime Minister for 7 years. The police warned her all this would happen if she continued to cut, but she's made no indication that she recognises this and will reverse the cuts to police numbers. Effectively, that means we are operating blind because we can't afford proper surveillance, proper infiltration, or even proper community policing. We currently have troops on the streets because we don't have enough armed officers anymore.
She is right that the internet is an absolutely toxic arena for all sorts of extremist ideologies, and that we have no sway on it at all. But the problem is kind of in the last sentence. We aren't in any sort of a position to control an international, intangible medium. If Russia, China and the USA can't do it, how the hell does she imagine she can? And while it's a huge tool of propaganda and recruitment, if they are moved from one page or site they will simply start new ones. It's playing Whack-a-Mole, because we have no control over what the propaganda producers are doing unless they are domestic. Most aren't. Attacking the internet is attacking a nebulous target - but a helpfully cost-free one, and also not one she can be blamed over for cuts.
Both parties, in leaving the EU, are worryingly opening us up to a dilution in intelligence. Fortunately our relationship with the US will remain as that's an important one - but Trump scares me on that front and there is nothing either party can do there.
Corbyn was committed in the manifesto, before the latest attacks, to a huge increase in police numbers, so they can infiltrate and conduct surveillance, plus better community policing so they know what is happening on the ground at an earlier stage and can hopefully prevent radicalisation. A key risk factor in radicalisation is a criminal past, and people are often radicalised in jail, so it's also important to offer better education and to reduce poverty and disengagement with society generally. Austerity does not achieve that.
He has also openly talked about the need to have difficult conversations with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, as there is a huge amount of money going into extremist Islamic propaganda in this country and a lot can, it is believed, be traced back to Saudi and the Wahhabist Islam they espouse.
He believes that shoot to kill should be available, but a focus on it is to miss the main point which is that we need to seek to prevent terrorists ever being on the streets in the midst of an attack. Cutting off funding, dissuading radicalisation, strengthening the police and talking with people who wish us harm, as we ended up (successfully) doing with the IRA, UDA, etc is also a suggestion, though I am doubtful because in Ireland there were concrete aims: ISIS have no concrete aims, other than world domination, so how can we negotiate at all? We can't. Nonetheless, the dialling down on rhetoric is likely in itself to prevent some young people finding out more and being corrupted. Posturing for political effect recruits for both side's positions, unfortunately. It's also the case that failing to recognise the Saudi money creating new, radical Mosques, and discriminating between that strand of extremism and mainstream Islam in this country is problematic because you then make more young people alienated, and likelier to be radicalised. ISIS have killed thousands of times more Muslims in the Middle East than Europeans over here, and so there's a genuine common ground in seeking to defeat them.
Having said all of that, I think it's safe to say that terrorism is not likely to be defeated by any domestic policies. It hasn't been, anywhere. All we can do is reduce incidence.