Sometimes in politics, as in life, it may be necessary – or unavoidable – to offend somebody. It’s not ideal, of course, and most of us would like to avoid doing so, provided there’s another way to do what needs to be done. But there are times when squaring that particular circle isn’t possible. Sometimes you have to say what needs saying, despite sensitivities, because truth (or practicality) trumps tip-toeing around people’s feelings.

To go further, who one offends, and how much, can at times be instructive. Back when I was campaigning to reveal and reform MPs’ expenses, I used to check what the most obtuse and entitled parliamentarians thought was justified, and then advocate the opposite.

In even rarer situations, choosing to offend particular people for a specific purpose can be politically beneficial. It’s risky, but it can be done. Sir Keir Starmer has been deliberately rough with Corbynites, and with antisemites, in his party because he believes it’s deserved but also to signal to voters that he embodies change. At various times in David Cameron’s leadership, his team picked fights with Tory traditionalists, to communicate “modernisation” to voters.

Giving offence might sometimes be inevitable. It can also be instructive. Sometimes, used carefully, it can be helpful.

However, none of that makes it a good idea for its own sake. In politics, offending to gain lessons or send signals is sometimes privately referred to as “offending the right people”. That’s........

© iNews