FOR a decision allegedly taken to protect MPs, last week’s tampering with Westminster protocol hasn’t half enabled racist rhetoric and inflamed an already-febrile atmosphere.

While politicians’ fears for their safety may be real, the spectre of violence raised by Keir Starmer and Lindsay Hoyle was always in danger of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

As we have now seen, it paved the way for the conflation of anti-genocide protesters with “extremists”, the incendiary and unsubstantiated use of the word “mobs” and a wave of Islamophobia unleashed by Suella Braverman. In her Telegraph column, she claimed the country was “sleep-walking into a ghettoised society” which emperilled freedom of expression.

But whatever social/ethnic/religious polarisation is taking place, we aren’t “sleep-walking” into it – we have been led there by dog-whistle rants such as the former Home Secretary’s.

Braverman appears oblivious to, or heedless of, the links between her comments and the racist slurs Humza Yousaf – the leader of the party whose Opposition Day motion was sabotaged– receives on a daily basis. Jibes such as “First Minister for Hamas” are the product of far-right propaganda which spreads the lie that most Muslims are radicalised (even when they unequivocally condemn terrorism).

Yet Yousaf himself is not above amplifying hate speech when it suits his own agenda. On Friday, he retweeted a P&J front page with photographs of Starmer, Rachel Reeves and Ed Miliband, all wearing cloaks, under a headline reading: The Traitors.

FM Humza Yousaf

Meanwhile, there is nothing that says “freedom of expression” quite like handing the police extra powers to crack down on demonstrations. How much cognitive dissonance does it require to accuse others of undermining democracy while trying to strip the public of its right to hold you to account?

Complex reality

The Hamas attacks, the ongoing hostage situation, and the Israeli onslaught on the civilian population of Gaza present an almost........

© Herald Scotland