Below is the full text of a letter I sent to the Scotsman. It was published in an edited form on the 25th of November.

Sir,

Freedom has few friends, and the New Labour government is certainly not amongst them. For proof of its frostiness, one need only read the Civil Contingencies Bill, which the government hopes to make law this year.

The Bill defines the powers available to ministers in the event of an emergency. They are very wide indeed: a senior minister may make emergency regulations that ‘make any provision’ which he ‘thinks is for the purpose of preventing, controlling or mitigating’ the emergency.

The definition of an emergency is equally wide: ‘an event or situation’ that threatens human welfare, the environment or the ‘security of the United Kingdom.’ That would seem to cover almost everything (and almost anything), but just in case there’s any doubt, ministers are free to specify whether an event does, or does not, meet the definition.

“Any provision” means just that, any provision that could be made “by Act of Parliament or by exercise of the Royal Prerogative”. The text helpfully provides some pointers: emergency regulations may prohibit assemblies, provide for the confiscation of property without compensation or, under clause 21.3.j, "disapply or modify an enactment". Other suggestions include the prohibition of travel, forced relocation, compulsory labour and the establishment of emergency tribunals.

No exceptions are made: if he is ‘satisfied’ that an emergency "has occurred or is about to occur", and that his actions are in ‘due proportion’, a minister may dismiss any assembly, not excluding the devolved assemblies and Westminster itself, and disapply any enactment, not excluding the Human Rights Act, the Representation of the People Act or even habeas corpus. Ministers may also delegate powers to “any specified person”, not excluding foreign officials. Civil libertarians will be relieved to learn, however, that emergency regulations cannot compel military service or break strikes, although really determined ministers may find the aforementioned clause 21.3.j useful in this regard.

Extraordinary situations call for extraordinary actions, but the powers granted by the Bill exceed any that will ever be required, even in the worst emergencies. In its current form the Bill could indeed be used to “remove legislation underpinning the British Constitution and infringe human rights" as the Joint Committee reporting on the Bill justly feared. We may never face the worst, but every potential fuel-protester, anti-war demonstrator or awkward- squad editor now has grounds for alarm.

Before being enacted, the Bill must be amended to protect our basic liberty. There should be no draconian powers to amend legislation, no use of the Royal Prerogative by ministers, safeguards on the delegation of emergency powers and a requirement of accountability to the Crown for actions taken by all those exercising them.

If, however, this Bill is passed into law unchanged, Britain as we've known it, the long experiment in individual freedom and limited government, will be gone. In its place will be another country entirely. Perhaps that’s the plan; the current government has never seemed to like the Britain it presides over very much.

Yours sincerely

Jamie Young