Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I like intellectuals, and always feel they should be given the benefit of the doubt; whether they are the Prime Minister or head of the Metropolitan Police. But in this case, there is no longer any doubt: Ian Blair must go. Leaving everything else aside - which in this case is difficult as an innocent man was shot in our name - Blair was faced with a clear choice and had plenty of time to make it. Should the Met agree there had been a system failure, whatever the mitigating circumstances, and therefore plead guilty to health and safety failure? Or should he insist that despite regrettable errors etc, they got nothing wrong that they should own up to? As the man in charge, it was Blair's call. It seems he was advised to say sorry and plead guilty on behalf of the Met. Instead, like any small-time chancer (or should I say well-healed villain with tame lawyers) he decided to go for a not-guilty verdict and trash the man they should not have shot. The jury found against him. Therefore he has to go.
The larger issue here is a British system in which those in charge forgive themselves for behaviour that would lead to jail for the rest of us. If only we had been able to apply H&S regulations to the implementation of the Iraq war we could have got rid of the other Blair even earlier. It seems to confirm one of the theses in Peter Oborne's argument about the new political class. They don't think the rules apply to them.
There is also now a Facebook group set up by James Graham, Sir Ian Blair must go
