Blair wishes to shift political conflict from the economy towards that which pundits in the United States have termed "culture wars". He has chosen civil liberties as the battleground, arguing that freedom is not preferable to security.
He outlines controversial new steps, ranging from seizing assets from suspected drug dealers - which could see anyone stopped with more than £1,000 having the money confiscated - to draconian new restrictions on the movements of those suspected of involv-ement in organised crime.
Even if they are not convicted of a crime and there is insufficient evidence to try them, suspects could be banned from associating with certain individuals or travelling to certain places, in order to disrupt trades such as human trafficking.
Blair argues that crafting new laws to disrupt designated groups, even if they abrogate due process, are appropriate for ensuring that the majority of voters no longer live in fear of a criminal minority. In his email exchange with an Observer columnist, Blair justified authoritarian measures by results:
In the exchange with Porter, Blair admits measures such as the antisocial behaviour laws have 'disturbed the normal legal process' but argues that previously police were not prosecuting over such crimes: 'Where these powers are being used, the law-abiding no longer live in fear of the lawless.'
He defended controversial action on asylum and immigration as necessary to prevent racists exploiting the issues.
And he said [Lord] Steyn's criticism, in a lecture earlier this year, showed 'how out of touch much of the political and legal establishment is today', adding that he remains determined to go further down the same road: 'I would widen the police powers to seize the cash of suspected drug dealers, the cars they drive round in... I would impose restrictions on those suspected of being involved in organised crime. In fact I would generally harry, hassle and hound them until they give up or leave the country.'
The Guardian article sets out some of the concerns on civil liberties in the three major parties. Yet, it is unclear why such an issue will acquire greater importance than the ever-important 'schoolzandhospitalz'.
Blair needs to maintain other fronts in order to draw attention away from his policy failures and undermine the reputation of his electoral opponents. The latest gimmick is civil liberties, a sector vulnerable to state action with little chance of a popular defence. Yet, the criminalisation of many middle-class drivers, the triumph of gimmicks over an effective criminal justice system and the increased coarsening of the streets with yobbery, leads to a reality break between what people hear from Blair and what they actually experience.
This 'reality break' can never be bridged by the 'ratchet effect' of the Labour authoritarians, trapped in their vicious circle of centralisation as they are unble to effect real policies of individual empowerment that reduce the power of the state.