AS the British public's support for war on Iraq wanes, so the Prime Minister's resolve stiffens.

At his press conference yesterday, Tony Blair made it clear that he was prepared to send our troops into action despite the doubts within his own party, his Cabinet and in the country.

York MP Hugh Bayley today reveals himself to be one of those doubters. Like many other Labour MPs, he wants the UN, rather than the US, to make the final judgement.

He is right. Any strike must be sanctioned by the international community, or Britain and the States will be portrayed as the only aggressors. That would enrage the Arab world and provoke more terrorist attacks.

Mr Bayley's words echo those of International Development Minister Clare Short. Another Cabinet split emerged when Home Secretary Jack Straw was publicly slapped down by Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon for saying war was becoming less likely.

Mr Blair, though, is not allowing these squalls to blow him off course. We must take action to nullify the direct threat to Britain from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, he insists.

However often he repeats this message, many remain unconvinced. Until the case against Saddam is proven, the British people will remain reluctant to support military action which could cost the lives of Iraqi children and British service personnel. If Mr Blair has unambiguous evidence, now is the time to share it.

Hans Blix, leader of the UN weapons inspectors, today appealed for more time to look for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. If the Anglo-American alliance ignores him, it will grant credence to the cynics' belief that this war is about little more than US politics and petroleum.

Even with more proof of Saddam's threat, we would still need to know the precise ambition of a war. Is it simply to cripple Saddam, or to remove him and free his people by installing a democracy? The latter has the greater moral worth, but that noted moralist Mr Blair has yet to suggest it.

Updated: 11:30 Tuesday, January 14, 2003