How offensive!

I watched a clip from the Home Affairs Select Committee on Sky News, which was looking into the recent demonstrations in support of Gaza/Palestine. An organiser (of Palestinian descent) of the most recent march was explaining what he thought was meant by the phrase ‘from the river to the sea, Palestinians will be free’ - which some interpret to mean the destruction of the state of Israel. He spoke calmly, politely and unapologetically—explaining that Palestinians, whether resident in Gaza, Israel itself or the occupied territories wanted to live free from oppression. As he continued his answer (in a select committee he would have been asked a question before speaking) the chair, Diana Johnson (Lab. Hull North) rudely interrupted him saying ‘I’m in the chair!’ and expressed her concern that what he had just explained could cause offence and it was imperative to maintain ‘balance.’
 
If a select committee chair, of all people thinks that witnesses are there to provide ‘balance’ then they are clearly in the wrong job. I’m not going to watch the whole proceedings of the committee, but I wonder if Diana—Dame Diana—will have closed down those who may have been invited along to answer for the opposite and potentially equally ‘offensive’ view. It’s a new twist on the concept of parliamentary privilege protecting free speech. Select committees are supposed to get to the bottom of things—with robust questioning. And if a witness chooses to hang themselves so much the better for getting at the truth. So, once again for Dame Diana to shut a witness up just because she thought something offensive might be said is in itself offensive and I am bloody offended.