MANY readers will have seen Tony Blair recently outlining his ideas for new laws to combat terrorism.

I was on the London Tube the day after the July 7 attacks, and the fear of another attack was almost tangible. We need effective measures to prevent such violence.

However, despite my fear of terrorism, I am far more afraid of what Mr Blair's new laws will do to our democracy and freedom.

Take the outlawing of expressions of support for terrorism. It might sound good - all decent people are appalled by those who attempt to justify mass murder on the tube. But how, in law, is terrorism defined?

In my dictionary it is violence used to put pressure on a government or society. By that definition, Nelson Mandela and any who supported him 20 years ago would be banned. Likewise, Sir Winston Churchill, due to his support for the French Resistance. Even Tony Blair himself could be caught out due to his support for the invasion of Iraq.

If this law is passed, even those who abhor terrorism but just seek to understand its causes could be caught out. From now on, we will have to be careful what we say in pubs or any social gathering, in case someone overhears. Anything we say could be used to slap a control order on us. We will not be told our alleged crime and will have no right of appeal.

Of course, terrorism needs to be tackled. But this should be done in a way that does not catch out innocent people and so that the communities we need to help the police are not alienated.

No law will stop people having opinions, no matter how abhorrent. Bad opinions are dealt with by good arguments, not criminalisation.

Dr Stephen Leah,

Gresley Court,

Acomb,

York.

Updated: 09:30 Wednesday, August 10, 2005