No problem with the quote, Keith.

As I said, I don't believe for one moment that this is an easy decision for anyone who thinks about it. I agree that we are fortunate in not having many racial attacks that end in killings, but we are not free of race riots by any means, and I would not underestimate the consequences if - a big if - we lost our grip on race relations. And of course, you need not go as far as death. How many violent beatings that end in permanent damage do you trade off against each death due to terrorism?

So: I respect your views and am sure you have thought long and hard in coming to them. I recognise that there is the possibility that another attack could kill far people than 7/7 did. Nevertheless, I have come to different a different balance and would want to make sure that we have looked at all the other options properly (such as the staffing and resources question I raised above) before we implement laws which may have all sorts of unexpected side effects.


You may recall that this thread is actually about whether this is the start of the end for Blair. I don't think it is, particularly if there is another major terrorist attack anywhere in America, Europe or Australia. Even without that, he's too skilful a politician to let a single defeat get to him. Everything hinges on whether he can prevent defeats on the other major manifesto issues.