Will politics forever be seen through a prism of being a leaver or remainer? It feels that way at the moment.

The referendum campaign finished many months ago, yet the febrile atmosphere of an election has prevailed.

There is very little prospect of a general election or second referendum any time soon, yet the BBC is among those caught in the crossfire.

Brexiters wrote to executives accusing the public broadcaster of bias recently while remainers complain about how many appearances the former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage gets on the panel show Question Time.

Veteran presenter Nick Robinson claimed in a defence of the broadcaster last week that they are being accused of everything from taking the Government's line to ignoring the views of the 48 per cent and being intimidated by the Brexiteers?'

But it is not just in the media sphere that there seems to be an allergy or even acknowledgement there might be opposing views.

Brexit-backing MPs walked out of a meeting and refused to back a cross-party Brexit committee report which pointed out that there was no evidence to back up the prime minister's claim that leaving the European with no deal was better than a bad deal.

Attack seems to be the best form of defence if someone is putting forward an opposing view in the current political climate.

And it is not just in the Brexit debate that we are seeing this approach.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's extraordinary interview with ITV this week was another example of a tendency to shoot the messenger.

When asked if it was time for him to stand aside as members of his own party are suggesting, Corbyn accused the media of failing to report fairly on the Labour Party.

When Labour's free school meal policy hit the headlines and people started asking questions about the detail, a former advisor of Corbyn's took to Twitter when there was not blanket glowing coverage to claim that it showed that if Jeremy Corbyn was saying it then the media would find a way to oppose it.

He conveniently forgot the media backlash and probing questions directed towards the government just a few weeks ago over a National Insurance tax rise for the self-employed.

Of course, parts of our press are partisan. That is the prerogative of a free press.

The Express takes a combative approach to making the case for our departure from the European Union just as The New European, which is published by Archant, believes passionately that we should stay.

A new publication, The Canary, presents a perspective which is sympathetic to Jeremy Corbyn and often runs pieces highlighting media bia.

This approach has now spilled over into the way politicians are starting to behave. Going on the offensive has become an easy way to deflect attention from a tricky question or issue.

There is a fine line between conviction and dogmatism and much of the debate is conducted with the latter.

Why can't you still believe that we would be better off in the European Union, but believe it would be better for the country to get on with it rather than continue the fight without being accused of rolling over?

And shouldn't you be able to believe Britain will have a bright future after Brexit whilst acknowledging that the process is going to be tricky, and that the European Union might have a point in the negotiations. Politics feels like it has lost its shades of grey at times. Staff of MPs talk of the anger which they have been encountering in their inboxes since the referendum. And this may well be because of the binary way in which the political debate is sometimes framed. It is inevitable, given that Brexit is the issue which is dominating public life, that we view our politicians through the prism of which side of the bitter referendum fight they were on. But it is worth remembering parliament can be collegiate and people can have civil disagreements without being accused of betrayal. The ability to compromise ensured that the Conservative and Liberal coalition government survived for five years. Today MPs across parties are working together on health issues. Most cross-party select committees are harmonious. The extreme positions some politicians are taking, coupled with accusations of bias do not helping to calm the atmosphere and people will continue to be very angry for some time to come if we go on like this.