It's OK to not understand encryption - it's a difficult subject.
You propose things in public that have been demonstrated to be beyond the limits of possibility. You've been told this before. Yet you keep asking in public for magic technologies that can't be made.
You are a grown up with the resources of an entire government department backing you. You therefore appear to be unable to find competent technical advice on this subject. As a government minister, finding competent advisors is (or should be) one of your key skills. If this is beyond you it suggests that you are not competent.
But that's not really the case, is it? This whole fiasco is not about whether you understand encryption or not - the whole thing is a diversion. You (or more correctly, some of the people advising you) are very aware of what you're aiming at. It's fully backdoored access to the encrypted communications of the general public, and framing it as counter terrorism is merely a convenient means of achieving that goal. You will moan and fuss about creating magic encryption that allows governments to snoop but no-one else, all the while pushing companies further into a corner, so that backdoors are created anyway and damn the consequences.
The more fuss you can make about experts sneering at you, or technology companies refusing to work with you, the more you can hoodwink the general public into not trusting the technology experts. And if the general public don't listen to the technology experts there will be no-one to inform them of the full implications of what you're doing - an end to privacy, an end to private life, and the birth of a fully automated police state.
Don't believe me?
"Later today the Home Secretary is expected to announced that people who repeatedly view terrorist content online could face up to 15 years in jail"
Yes, thoughtcrime really is going to be a thing now.