MARGARET Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George Bush. All of them have insisted that we should not let terrorists win by changing our way of life.

Be alert to the threat but do not stop flying or visiting capital cities through fear. Defy terrorism by ensuring that life continues as normal - that has been their message.

But if we give away basic principles of justice and freedom as a consequence of the terror threat, then we have allowed our way of life to fundamentally change. The terrorists will have won.

That is why we welcome the amendments to the Government's anti-terrorism Bill which have been made through the House of Lords.

It is right that control orders issued against suspected terrorists are issued in the first instance by judges and not politicians.

And it is right that the standard of proof is raised so that orders cannot be made purely on the basis of suspicion, but only when a judge is satisfied on "the balance of probabilities" that someone poses a terrorist threat.

It is now abundantly clear that there is widespread opposition to the Bill and the Government must make concessions in line with those concerns.

Given the gravity of the measures under consideration, and the restricted timescale, we also believe that the Conservative's "sunset clause" - guaranteeing a further review after November - makes sense.

Finding a balance between human rights and national security is a huge and unenviable task.

But we must not let the terrorists win by rushing into fundamental changes to the way we live.