WITH all that is going on both at home and abroad, you’d have every right to ask why we devoted three hours of parliamentary time to American billionaire and US presidential hopeful Donald Trump.
The answer is that his series of insults, directed at women, Mexicans, Muslims and others, drove more than 500,000 Britons to sign a petition calling for him to be banned from the UK.
Out of curiosity, more than anything else, I went to Westminster Hall on Monday to listen.
About 40 MPs took part, with a packed public gallery looking on.
Over in the US, the debate was being televised.
To be honest, I found the experience surreal.
Mr Trump had been rude, but he makes a career out of offending people.
Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our democracy and should be protected.
Unpleasant people say unpleasant things all the time, but that’s no reason to shut down debate.
Let me be clear, I do not defend Mr Trump’s pronouncements in any way.
But I would defend to the hilt his right to say what he likes, even if he causes offence.
‘Hate speech’ is a different matter and is punishable under the law, but what concerns me is that the two are being increasingly conflated.
A report this week found that 90 per cent of British universities banned controversial speakers in 2015.
This, when universities should encourage discussion, free expression and dissidence.
Meanwhile, I say let’s invite Mr Trump to our shores and through debate, express our distaste for his views.
What have we to fear?
Politicians are especially vulnerable to either causing offence or being offended against.
We should take it in our stride, for intolerance must never curtail a freedom we hold dear.