He's right it is a 'moral' question...
'...stated he was “puzzled by the caricatures in the current debate, where almost every attempt to tackle the misuse of encryption by criminals and terrorists is seen as a ‘backdoor’.”'
When people have been lied to by state agents, and when those agents have seen fit to act regardless of 'just cause' or actual 'evidence', is it any wonder that said 'people' are just a tad cynical about any subsequent 'promises' and 'explanations', even when they are made in good faith. That's what happens when you lose trust---people don't trust you. Quelle suprize!
The 'moral' question is: What can our state agents do to convince us that they will act with integrity and good faith towards 'the people' whose lives and livelihoods they are charged to protect?
In reality there is probably nothing they can do; they've blown it. They blew it years (hundreds of years) ago. The only thing that has changed is the extent of their reach and the time-frame of their reach---longer reach, and much faster. Apart from that it really is business as usual, and hoping that there are always enough 'good' people in the system to mitigate the worst tendencies of those who are motivated by greed, power, and fear.
The best we can probably hope for is some kind of Mexican stand-off, between the state agents, the criminals, and the rest of us. The graveyard scene in 'The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly', comes to mind, but without a resolution.