As a Liberal, I think it is always important to know where we stand on matters and, just as important, to know why we stand there. After ‘do no harm’, a very basic tenet of liberalism is that all people are free to do, say and think whatever they like, when and wheresoever they like, as long as, is so doing, they do not infringe anyone else’s right to do the same. In our liberal democracy, this simple yardstick should be all that a government requires to ensure the freedoms of its citizens and to protect us from those who would seek to restrict or remove them – or to restrict or remove anyone who might hold alternative opinions.

As a result we have laws to control hate speech, inciting violence again people and property, and seeking to disrupt or overthrow democratic assemblies and institutions. In a free society we do not have a right not to be offended – I am offended by the Conservative Party and views of Nigel Farage, but both are (rightly) allowed to exist and speak their minds as long as they do not break the law by restricting or denying the rights of others.

It is in this regard that the Labour government is now sailing close to the wind.

You will have heard me say many times that language is important. I think precise language is very important when dealing with conflict and at times when emotions and tempers might be running high. Here is a bit of background and an example of what I believe separates acceptable protest from the unacceptable, legal protest from the illegal, and free protest methods from terrorism.

For the example I am going to give it might help to know that I have Jewish heritage, and I am intensely proud of that as I am of my Irish, Cornish, Italian and Yorkshire heritage. I am an atheist and have not ever been religiously Jewish and neither, to the best of my knowledge, has anyone in my family for generations. My paternal grandmother had Polish Jewish antecedence and we have traced her Jewish roots back from Krakow in the 19^th Century, to Austria in the late 18^th Century, and from there back to Russia before that.

I am strongly opposed to antisemitism, as I am to any form of ethnic prejudice based on generic hate. In the current conflict in Gaza, and across the wider region, I try always to be careful how I describe what I think the problems are and where (if any) the blame might lie.

For example, it would certainly be antisemitic to suggest that Jews are in anyway guilty of anything that is happening in Gaza now, or has ever happened there. I do not believe, however, that it is in anyway antisemitic or anti-Israeli to full-throatedly condemn Netanyahu, and the right-wing henchmen in his government, for the atrocities being inflicted on innocent Palestinians. Genocide may well be what is happening, but personally I do not find that language helpful in the circumstances as it deflects from the war crimes that are most certainly being committed in Israel’s name.