THE decision to publish an advertisement for the British National Party in the run-up to last week's Sedgefield by-election was not taken lightly. I agonised over it and I'm still wrestling with my conscience.

Inevitably, there was a strong reaction, with letters and emails questioning the justification for allowing a hateful party to promote itself.

I respect the views of those - including some of my own colleagues - who think I was wrong. But it is important to explain why I believe the right decision, if not the easy one, was made.

Whether we like it or not, the BNP is a legitimate party. Society has decreed that it has the legal right to take part in our democratic system - a system built on free speech.

What would that freedom mean if it were denied to an organisation just because we disagreed with its beliefs? Where would the line of censorship be drawn?

The advertisement did not contain offensive material, but I insisted on it carrying a statement that The Northern Echo did not endorse the party or its views.

I also wrote a comment underlining the paper's abhorrence of everything the BNP stands for, the reasons for publishing the advertisement, and the fact that the proceeds would be donated to the Butterwick Children's Hospice.

The next day, the BNP attempted to place a second advertisement. This time I considered the content to be unacceptable and it was therefore rejected.

That led to an angry letter from BNP leader Nick Griffin, demanding that the decision was reversed. When it wasn't, the party's website urged supporters to bombard The Northern Echo with telephone protests, and obnoxious calls flooded in from as far afield as Canada.

Suffice to say that the BNP doesn't have a very high opinion of me or The Northern Echo, which is very good news indeed.

Whether I was right to publish the first advertisement is, of course, open to question. But if, as a society, we believe that the BNP has no place in the democratic process, no right to field candidates and no right to place legal advertisements, then it should be declared an unlawful organisation.

In my view, the BNP is more likely to prosper through apathy, ignorance and a pretence that it does not exist, than through a newspaper highlighting the threat it poses.

The letters and emails sent to me last week made uncomfortable reading. But the very fact that there was strong reaction is also reassuring - because it shows that decent people are well aware of the BNP's threat.

ALAN Milburn and Ruth Briel came up with the perfect solution to the wedding present dilemma when they celebrated their marriage at the Houses of Parliament.

The couple asked for donations to help establish a classroom in Africa. In fact, enough was raised for Oxfam to build two classrooms.

As one of the guests, I can report that the Darlington MP is a nifty mover, and that the member for North Tyneside, Stephen Byers, will never win Strictly Come Dancing.

Other guests included Alastair Campbell, David Miliband, John Reid, Charles Clarke, Tessa Jowell, Hilary Armstrong and Peter Mandelson.

I asked Mr Mandelson if he remembered our last conversation.

"No, remind me," he said.

"You phoned to shout at me over the paper's stance on the ghost ships," I told him.

"Ah, yes, I do remember," he replied. There was a thoughtful pause before he added: "And, I was absolutely right."

It must be wonderful to be so sure of yourself.