THE MP for South Swindon and former justice secretary Robert Buckland has defended the government's Crime and Police Bill against claims it would restrict non-violent protest.

He spoke on BBC Radio 4's Today programme earlier after Baroness Camilla Cavendish warned the new measures would create a "police state" because they would give officers too much power to quash peaceful public demonstrations because of high noise levels.

Her House of Lords colleague Baroness Shami Chakrabarti took part in a lively discussion on-air with Mr Buckland to challenge him on his view that the extra powers which would be given to police were fair.

She said: “Him calling these measures proportionate contradicts what Amnesty International have said, what Justice has said, what a range of retired senior police officers have said. These measures go much further than he suggested.

“The police have powers to intervene with obstruction of the highway already but under new measures, they would be allowed to stop and search people without suspicion – not because they fear knife crime or terrorism but because they fear noise and impact and disruption which are inherent in any peaceful non-violent protest.”

Mr Buckland said: "Some of the characterisation of these new powers is misplaced. What I see from government is a proportionate use of powers. The engagement of the rights of protestors with the rights of the rest of the public to go about their daily business is a delicate balance to be struck.

“I think this bill does strike the right balance. I do not see anything more than a consolidation of the existing common law of public nuisance and the specific creation of new powers to be used only in limited circumstances.

“The government is seeking to apply the same rules to static protest that we have for mobile marches. I don’t see how that is in any way offensive to freedom of speech."

Mr Buckland oversaw the first part of the bill with government colleagues last year and it passed through the House of Commons. Then, before Christmas, the Home Secretary added extra new rules in response to the Insulate Britain protests which saw people gluing themselves to major roads like the M25. The House of Lords will debate these late additions today.

He added: "With regards to the M25, the government resorted to the use of civil injunctions to get things moved on, and that’s all well and good but it takes time, creates more inconvenience to road users.

"It’s better that we have delineated powers defined by Parliament which allow the police to intervene with the power of arrest, to create offences which can be dealt with in the magistrates court which specifically deal with things like gluing yourself to the road or locking yourself onto each other.

“Rightminded members of the public will view this as a balanced approach to a problem which caused serious disruption to many innocent people in recent months.”

Baroness Chakrabarti strongly disagreed: "The rules for attaching yourself and locking on are so vague, it could criminalise people with bike locks or who link arms with each other in the street.

"All of these measures are specifically directed at non-violent protest. These measures are a response by the government to take proportionality away and give ever-broader powers to the Home Secretary  and police to shut down peaceful dissent and voices with which the government does not agree.

"It’s one law for those with whom the government agrees and another for everyone else."

Protestors marched on Westminster yesterday urging the House of Lords to Kill the Bill and stop it being passed. A similar protest was held at Regent Circus in Swindon last April. It is feared that the new bill - if it becomes law - would lead to these protests becoming criminalised.

Baroness Chakrabarti added: "These laws have been compared to Belarus and Russia by Amnesty International.”

This riled Robert Buckland, who responded: "That’s a grotesque and disproportionate way to describe this. I don’t think hyperbole helps us at all.

"This is a reasonable response to a genuine concern from members of the public who have had their lives disrupted in ways which are frankly not acceptable, we’ve got to get the balance right and I think these measures strike that balance.”