Inadequate fervour offends

Tony Blair when questioned on his 'carbon footprint', his holiday in Florida, and making people better.

"So we've got to be realistic about how much obligation we've got to put on ourselves. The danger, for example, if you say to people 'Right, in Britain ... you're not going to have any more cheap air travel,' everybody else is going to be having it. So you've got to do this together in a way that doesn't end up actually putting people off the green agenda by saying you must not have a good time any more and can't consume. All the evidence is that if you use the science and technology constructively, your economy can grow, people can have a good time, but do so more responsibly."

He's right. People are not going to change substantially. Make flying expensive, and the same sort of people who complain now about cheap flights will complain about the inequality of travel. Same with cars, which have probably done more to inculcate the sense of freedom than any legislation. Stopping people moving would do more to undermine the capitalist economy, the most successful economy in history, than the Soviet Union ever managed. I suspect that this is actually the motivation behind much of the passion for draconian environmental policies.

There's something else as well, which Blair nods at with that phrase "you must not have a good time any more". It is the eternal spirit of the Puritan, present in all self-respecting revolutionary movements, always striving to change not just what people do, but how they think, what they say. The Puritan would pierce the walls of our houses and mount guard on every room to regulate and improve our behaviour, to make us better. For the Puritan is anguished by the mere suspicion that somewhere someone is having a good time; that millions are doing so before his eyes is unendurable.

There are other satisfactions to be gained by transforming a practical issue into a moral one - the invigorating air of the High Moral Ground; the warm furry security of moral superiority; the easy, quick-reference ranking of sinful actions and words allowing for on-the-spot verbal fines and, last but never least, a handy lexicon of anathema to be used loudly, repeatedly and as if spitting. Righteousness is irresistible, indignation addictive; lack of fervour unforgivable.

A messianic glint on the screen

Last night, I felt at a loose end and considered, for the first time in several months, turning on the TV. But then I thought of the last time I'd turned on the TV and the time before that. So I didn't. The next time I feel that worm of an impulse, I'll also remember this.

Tony Blair is hunched over the basin at his posh new home in Connaught Square, central London. He is cleaning his hands with soap – at first gently, then more and more furiously. His wife, Cherie, appears at the bathroom door and watches her husband's actions with increasing horror. Robert Lindsay plays Tony Blair with a messianic glint in the eye. Like a man possessed, he is now scrubbing with a scarily obsessive vigour. Two words spring to mind: Lady Macbeth.

Wow! Original, or what?

It's a scene in Channel 4's upcoming The Trial of Tony Blair. It sounds like it's written by people who talk a lot, veering between well-heeled righteous indignation and resentment that nobody recognises that they would do so much better a job, all calibrated by the number of pints they've had.

"The world needs me, as Britain once needed me. But I've done Britain, Britain's sorted. I've outgrown Britain. I need a bigger stage now."

Said Tony. A moment before the Truth of his Evil was thrust in his face. Momentarily, he broke down. But no, he can never acknowledge the Truth. He'll wheedle out of this one, too.

Listen to the Producer, Hal Vogel.

In the face of mass corruption, the lampooning of the powerful becomes all the more important.

The great irony is that as one of his legacies, Tony Blair signed up to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. George W Bush refused to, presumably because he was worried about being called before it. He wanted to be able to do whatever he liked – pre-emptive strikes being one of his favourites.

Mass corruption? Where's he living? Pre-emptive strikes being one of his favourites? Yeah, and he wanted to prove that he's got a bigger dick than his daddy. Yeah, and it's all about oil, you know. And looking after Israel.

Wake up

Tony Blair speaking yesterday in Dubai.

There is a monumental struggle going on worldwide between those who believe in democracy and modernisation, and forces of reaction and extremism. It is the 21st century challenge. Yet a great part of our own opinion either thinks there is no common theme to it all; or if there is, is inclined to believe that it is our - that is America and its allies - fault that this is so.

In any other situation in which terrorists with almost incredible wickedness butcher completely innocent people, provoke sectarian conflict, spread chaos and despair, in almost any other situation we would say well our response should be to stand up and fight back. In Iraq, in Afghanistan, but seeping across the board, voices instead say: we shouldn't be involved: better leave well alone; it is none of our business.

Here are elements of the Government of Iran openly supporting terrorism in Iraq to stop a fledgling democratic process, trying to turn out a democratically elected Government in Lebanon, flaunting the international community's desire for peace in Palestine - at the same time as denying the Holocaust and trying to acquire a nuclear weapon capability: and yet a huge part of world opinion is frankly almost indifferent. It would be bizarre if it weren't so deadly serious.

We have in my view to wake up...

We should stop buying into this wretched culture of blaming ourselves, of pandering to a wholly imagined grievance on the part of those we are fighting. We should take on the nonsense that says when terrorists who claim to be Muslim kill innocent and true Muslims in Iraq or Afghanistan, that it is somehow the fault of American and British soldiers being present there.

We should proclaim what is so obviously correct, that what holds back the Palestinian people are not those of us striving to make a reality of a stable, viable Palestinian state next door to Israel, but those who pretend to champion that cause but deny the very two state solution that is Palestine's only hope of salvation.

Finally

Tony Blair has boldly said what has needed to be boldly said for quite some time now (and what John Howard has, in fact, been boldly saying for some time now). That, in this country, all cultures are not equal, that there is a hierarchy of values in which some abrogate others.

When it comes to our essential values - belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country and its shared heritage - then that is where we come together, it is what we hold in common.

It is what gives us the right to call ourselves British. At that point no distinctive culture or religion supercedes our duty to be part of an integrated United Kingdom.

Being British carries rights. It also carries duties. And those duties take clear precedence over any cultural or religious practice.

We must demand allegiance to the rule of law. Nobody can legitimately ask to stand outside the law of the nation. There is thus no question of the UK allowing the introduction of religious law in the UK. Parliament sets the law, interpreted by the courts. All criminal matters should be dealt with through the criminal justice system.