There is considerable evidence that political debate has become more threatening, menacing and, in some cases, downright nasty. A stubbornness has developed, where people simply don’t want to listen to – or even have to tolerate – the conflicting views of others. The modern desire tends towards the reinforcement of existing and firmly entrenched opinions, with alternative positions crushed – sometimes aggressively – under the weight of popular outrage and anger.

Our universities, once considered bastions of open and rigorous debate, run the risk of falling hostage to the safe-spaces and censorship of the professionally offended. Just this year, we learnt that more than 90 per cent of British university campuses have experienced some form of restriction on freedom of speech.

Meanwhile, much recent attention has also focused on individuals, fuelled by the immediate access and simplicity of social media into generating vile online abuse. But it’s not just some individuals or students who don’t want to hear the views of others. There are plenty of organisations that would rather bully or suppress than debate.

Last week saw the British Pregnancy Advice Service (BPAS) orchestrate a campaign against Boots. The company had refused to drop the price of a morning-after pill, it said, on the grounds that it “would not want to be accused of incentivising inappropriate use”. The morning-after pill is also readily available free for emergency use from outlets including A&E, walk-in medical centres, STD clinics, most GP surgeries and some pharmacies.