Blair Proclaims 'No Surrender' - What Does he Really Mean?

So Blair is refusing to compromise on the House Arrest Bill, as ever he believes and trusts the security bureaucrats who have never seen a civil liberty they couldn't subert or abuse. It is hard not to see this as more than a political tactic designed to put the Conservatives and Lib Dems on the back foot. In Blair's quest to be ever more conservative than the Conservatives the anti-terror legislation comes in very useful and in the up and coming election campaign will be a useful stick to beat the Conservatives with. Neither party has actually bothered to oppose the true problem with this bill: it's breaching of the right to a fair trial. I don't if this is a tactial move by the Tories or the Lib Dems being fearful of being seen 'weak' on security and terrorism or a combination of the two.

As a spectator of British politics sitting out in the sticks in Wiltshire it is utterly depressing to see ancient liberties such as the right to a fair trial being bargained away at Westminster. Even more depressing is the apathy in the wider population about it. I think there are understandable reasons for this, British people think that this legislation won't affect them so why bother getting worked up about it; or conversly they with resigned realism assume that they can't affect the outcome of these debates, so why bother . People don't seem to care that they could potentially be locked up without trial while being kept ignorant of the charges made against them.