What’s the first sign of decay, of political entropy? Is it when formerly loyal members of a party suddenly feel able to criticise their leader in public? I’m thinking of December last year when I stood outside Holyrood on a bitterly cold day and watched Joanna Cherry and Ash Regan lay into their own side. Someone mentioned the name Nicola Sturgeon and a thousand people booed. Ah right, I thought, something’s happening.

I suspect you’ve guessed already what kind of protest I’m talking about and why the two leading SNP women were rebelling. The Scottish Government’s bill on self-ID for trans people was being debated in the building behind them and they were expressing their concern about its potential impact on women’s rights and safety. Ms Regan, who’d been a minister before quitting over the issue, told the crowd that she had tried to submit amendments to the bill but hadn’t been allowed to. “I will never vote for a bill that puts women and girls in danger,” she said. “And this bill does not protect women’s rights.”

I’m going to be honest: I didn’t really think on the day that Regan was a terribly impressive performer and I still think there are way more articulate and effective advocates of gender-critical views (and Scottish independence). Such as Ms Cherry for example, who told the crowd that, as a human rights lawyer, she knew that, sometimes, rights conflict and when it happens, you need to have a civilised discussion about how we rub along. Hang on a minute. What’s happening now Mark? Nodding along to Joanna Cherry? Could it be you’re changing your mind?

I have to say that, a year on from the protest, I’m still not sure what the answer to that question really is – my views on self-ID are not yet in pin-sharp focus, put it that way – but the words of Joanna Cherry did strike a chord with me. The fact that the appeal for a civilised discussion came from someone I would normally label as “the other side” (on independence) made me pause. But she did put her finger on something a lot of us have been struggling with for some time and still are: the search for a centre.

My worry at the Holyrood protest was that it seemed to underline the fact that the political centre had apparently evaporated, on this issue and others. There were feminists who were saying the bill was an existential threat to women’s rights and there were LGBT activists who were saying that a failure to pass the bill would be an existential threat to trans people. Pick a side! (there’s only two). And prepare to fight!

Of course, the Government’s self-ID law never happened in the end, but the battle has continued and the latest frontline is a ordinary-looking corridor in Holyrood. Ms Regan, who stood for the SNP leadership, has now defected to Alba, which means she needs a new office and it’s been proposed she move to the section where the Greens and Lib-Dems are. However, transgender staff working with the Greens have reportedly raised safeguarding concerns about the move. One party source told The Scotsman most Greens “would sooner work from the parliament canteen than be office-mates with Ash Regan”.

I must say my heart sank to my shoes when I heard what the Greens were saying, firstly because it’s revealing of the problems in modern political behaviour and language (particularly from the Greens) and secondly because it touches on the ongoing search for the middle. Over the years, I have, as I’m sure you have too, shared offices with people I don’t like and whose opinions I don’t like (and people have had to share an office with me) and it’s a sign of maturity, and humanity, that you try to make the best of it and avoid being difficult or, to use Ms Regan’s word, petulant. It should go without saying.

The problem with the way the Greens have apparently reacted to the idea of sharing office space with Mr Regan is that they appear to be raising the concern they might not be safe. It’s hard to tell what people mean when they talk in this way and use words like “safe” or “safety” but if they mean a physical risk from Ms Regan, that’s clearly ridiculous and if they mean being exposed to her opinions, that’s something they’ll have to learn to live with I’m afraid. Whenever I’m working from home I’m in the pleasing situation of only ever having to face my own opinions, but in parliament you must and should share it with people who have different opinions (in fact, I would have thought it’s the raison d’etre of the place).

Raising safeguarding concerns about sharing an office with Ms Regan also reveals a tendency of some actors in the debate to ramp up the language to Level Ten which features words like “bigot” and “Nazi”. For example, I was sad to see the Labour activist Duncan Hothersall’s response to the Regan office stushi on X. He said that “if a Tory MP defected to the National Front and was moved to a shared office alongside minority ethnic staff and their employers expressed safety and welfare concerns on their behalf, I doubt anyone would be dismissing it.” This (references to the National Front and the far-right) is the kind of stuff you see and it isn’t helpful.

There is some hope though. You may have read the pieces I wrote recently about the writer and activist Graham Linehan, and one of the reactions to them came from Vic Valentine of the campaign group Scottish Trans. Vic’s response was that Linehan has been one of the main contributors to the toxic environment I said I wanted to see an end to, but it was the areas of agreement between Vic and I that were really interesting. Vic said children and young people should be safe and comfortable to express who they are but that children should not be presumed to be trans just because they don’t conform to gender stereotypes (boys liking dresses and dolls for example).

I absolutely agree with that and it seems to me it’s exactly the kind of area where the beginnings of a compromise and the foundations of a centreground might be found (it certainly won’t be found in suggesting people are unsafe to be around or comparing them to the National Front). Ms Regan said it was incumbent on politicians to reflect on the responsibility to work collaboratively, and she’s right, and I hope the Scottish Greens are listening and thinking about it.

However, every politician, activist, or commentator should also reflect on where a way forward is likely to lie – on trans rights, on independence, on anything. I think it’s in the middle. It’s in the centreground. It’s in the place we get to when extreme positions are softened and when both sides stop lobbing bombs and insults over no-man’s-land and realise neither will get their way unless they compromise. Lots of us have been looking for that place for some time now so we can vote for the person who finds it. But I'm afraid to say, as of November 2023, we’re still looking.