Chris Patten says his work last year on the Independent Commission for Policing in Northern Ireland, particularly in hearing the testimony of the victims of violence in both communities, was "the most difficult and painful and emotionally draining thing that I have ever done or would ever wish to do".
In his first extended interview on the issue since the report was published in October, he vigorously defends its balance, insisting on "the need to tell two stories". But he acknowledges with some regret that the full and rapid implementation of its 175 recommendations may be a casualty of the current crisis.
"I believe with a passion," he says, "that there is no alternative to either this peace process or something which is the spitting image of it, and I doubt whether anyone will come forward with better ideas about policing than we managed to come up with."
Reform of policing cannot be seen as separate from the peace process, he argues, either in terms of the security situation or political institutions. "We thought there was a symbiotic relationship. While some of our proposals would depend on what happened on the ground, some of our proposals would clearly affect for the better what was happening on the ground. But it is difficult to make those judgments when one isn't entirely clear where the security situation is going to develop.
"Now, clearly, a commitment to the democratic process involves an equal commitment to taking the gun out of politics, and I don't see how any number of elaborate casuistries can avoid that simple proposition.
"Secondly, in terms of governance, we were also keen to assert that as far as possible decisions about policing should be taken in Northern Ireland by people in Northern Ireland precisely because they matter so much to Northern Ireland. If you're set on the restoration of democratic institutions in Northern Ireland then it is preposterous to exclude the most sensitive of issues from all of that.
"Both those central arguments [the Good Friday agreement] are affected if some people now eschew their obligation to give primacy to democracy.
"And they're affected as well by the suspension of the powersharing Executive. I don't say any of that invalidates our report. Far from it. But our report was part of a process which I passionately hope hasn't been attenuated."
In a very practical sense, he says, the suspension of the Assembly inevitably affects implementation of the report. "We argued for a policing board based in part on the balance in the Assembly. Now if there is no acting Assembly it's much more difficult to establish such an institution. Not impossible, but you have to do it in rather different ways, and, not inconceivably, less democratically accountable ways."
Was he surprised by the venom of some of his unionist critics? "I was particularly surprised by some of those who posed as champions of policing in Northern Ireland who over the years have found themselves again and again confronting the police in Northern Ireland or making the job of police officer in Northern Ireland more difficult.
"Unlike some of my critics I've never had my collar felt by the RUC."
Of the name change from RUC to Police Service of Northern Ireland, he says: "There is, of course, a legitimate debate about our report and there are deep passions about the whole question of symbols. And to suppose that after doing 40 public meetings in Northern Ireland we did not understand that, is to ascribe to us an extraordinary degree of insensitivity.
"But we took decisions in good faith, and I was if anything surprised by the breadth of support for the majority of what we said."
Did he see the response to the report of the Northern Secretary, Mr Peter Mandelson, as fair, despite some tweaking of the recommendations?
"Yes, as I said in a statement at the time, and I discussed the matter with some of my colleagues on the commission. We understand that he had as difficult a job as we did. He and his officials and the government accepted that we got it just about right."
That view that they had got it broadly right was also shared, he believed, by many senior police officers
"One thing which I think was a little unfair was the criticism that we hadn't [got it right], and it's a matter of tone, sufficiently recognised the sacrifices made by the RUC over the years."
The commission's challenge was to reflect two stories, "two equally passionately felt stories, legitimate, credible. Not to recognise that would I think have been the beginning of folly. And if we hadn't recognised that, as we did in our report, stating our concern about the suffering on both sides, I think the report would have been regarded by part of the community as seriously deficient."
But he acknowledges the difficulties caused by that pain. "The thing that outsiders never comprehend is the intimacy of the experience of pain, the fact that you see the person that may have killed your son or husband or daughter or sister in the supermarket, in the street, day after day after day."