Do I owe Joanna Cherry an apology? Ms Cherry thinks I do because earlier this year I wrote a column about her which she said was a nasty hatchet job. I really don’t think it was – we just disagreed about Irish history – but we definitely should be talking about what is, and isn’t, acceptable criticism in this weird, post-2014 Scotland we live in. And so – with considerable wariness – I would like to write about Ms Cherry one more time. And hopefully suggest a way out of all this.

The immediate catalyst for writing about the nationalist MP again was the sentencing last week of a man who threatened her online. Grant Karte sent Ms Cherry messages that were “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character” and, as a result, a court has told him to do 160 hours unpaid work and ordered him not to contact the MP for five years. Ms Cherry said she was pleased he had finally been sentenced.

But she didn’t stop there. According to Ms Cherry, irresponsible accusations by senior figures in the SNP – linked to her sacking from the frontbench – made her a target for abuse, specifically the accusation that she was transphobic. She also said that, had action been taken earlier on harassment and abuse by Mr Karte and others, it would not have escalated in the way it did. No one in the SNP hierarchy, she said, acknowledged his behaviour or condemned it.

The affair is further complicated by the fact that the SNP has just appointed a new complaints officer, Ricky Taylor. Commenting on his appointment last week, Mr Taylor said he was up for the challenge of ensuring the party was a welcoming and safe place for everyone. But Ms Cherry pointed out that Mr Taylor had, in her words, a history of targeting her and calling her transphobic. “How did he pass vetting?” she asked.

You can see what a mess all of this is, but maybe we should remind ourselves of some basic principles and realities. We know the debate about the SNP and independence is nasty. We know it has led to people on both sides, and in particular women, being the subject of horrible and scary abuse. And we know – as Ms Cherry points out – that not enough has been done about it.

And so, the first part of any plan to get out of this is to do what Ms Cherry suggests and take action on the abusers. Ms Cherry says Mr Karte’s name has been removed from the roll of SNP members which is presumably a sign his actions have been recognised as reprehensible. But she also points out that it was not done publicly. That’s what needs to happen: anyone guilty of abuse or harassment or threats should be named, shamed and expelled from the party.

The second thing we could do is expedite the trans reforms, which have been central to the furore surrounding Ms Cherry. We are now in the process of a second consultation on the proposed law, the debate is still as bitter and angry as ever, and there is little prospect of us moving on until the Scottish Government actually takes action. The reforms it is proposing – to allow trans people to identify their own gender – have already been introduced in Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland and other countries without any of the horrendous consequences predicted by its Scottish critics. Introducing the law here without the roof caving in would be a chance for us – finally – to move on and for the wound to heal.

The third part of the plan involves, inevitably, independence. Joanna Cherry, as we know, is on one side of a divide in the SNP about how fast or effectively the party is moving towards independence and every other issue, including trans rights, tends to get dragged into the vortex. Up til now, the leadership has sought to assuage this wing of the party – the ones calling for another route to independence, or “Plan B” – but all that does is keep the argument and division going. Perhaps more honesty from the First Minister – that another referendum is a longer-term rather a shorter-term goal – would help. Perhaps it would make the Plan-B-believers face the facts.

I am not hopeful that any of this plan will come to pass soon, but I would particularly like to see the SNP and other parties taking action on the kind of abuse Ms Cherry has endured. People in public life should be protected from harassment and threats, and political parties should take action. Having said that, I would like to add one caveat which is – just to be 100% clear – not intended to diminish what Ms Cherry went through with Mr Karte in any way.

My point is this: in public life, there is abusive behaviour, such as the kind Ms Cherry faced from Mr Karte, and it should be dealt with by the parties. But other people who are out there in public – in a big way, like MPs, or in a small way, like me with my column – can also get pretty angry and passionate and words can get thrown around – including words like transphobic – without it necessarily leading to, or counting as, harassment or abuse. The column I wrote about Ms Cherry said it was irresponsible of her to claim Scotland could follow the Irish route to independence and I don’t think that’s wielding the hatchet or being nasty. It’s criticism. Equally, Ms Cherry was within her rights to come back at me, as she did, and call me ignorant and a bad journalist. Fair enough. I don’t expect an apology from her.

What I do expect is that we try to get the balance of public life right. Public figures are going to get splattered with mud and abuse and to some extent they have to take it if they wish to exist in a public realm that protects the right of free speech. But when the criticism becomes abuse and harassment, as it did in Ms Cherry’s case, parties also have a responsibility to get involved. The independence referendum of 2014 made the atmosphere in Scotland a whole lot worse for people in public life. So, before we even think about doing a referendum again, perhaps the parties could give some thought to how they can better protect their people.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.