John Howard has called for conscientious objectors to same-sex marriage to be given legal protection, drawing attention to the prospect the Coalition could legislate to allow people to refuse to provide goods and services to gay weddings.

Howard said the “overwhelming majority” of Liberal MPs would vote in favour of same-sex marriage if that was the result of the plebiscite, even if their personal view was against it.

Malcolm Turnbull confirmed on Friday MPs would be given a free vote after the plebiscite.

Howard said: “I do think one thing that has to be addressed is the question of proper protection of religious freedom, and freedom of conscience in relation to people who might in a tangential way be affected by this.”

The reference to people “tangentially affected” by same-sex marriage suggests Howard was referring to people other than ministers of religion, who Labor and the Coalition both agree should not be forced to conduct gay weddings.

Last week, the attorney general, George Brandis, refused to rule out exemptions to anti-discrimination law which would allow bakers, photographers, venue owners and others to refuse to provide services for gay weddings.

Labor has already ruled out supporting such changes.

Howard reiterated his opposition to marriage equality, and said opponents should not be “frightened or bullied into silence” by accusations of bigotry.

Howard said the UK’s vote to leave the European Union was a “reassertion of British sovereignty” after voters judged David Cameron’s renegotiation of terms with the EU was insufficient.

He said the desire to control immigration was “part of” the reason for the vote to leave, but also said it was “absurd” that the UK was subject to the European Court of Justice.

“For the nation that gave us the Magna Carta, for heaven’s sake, and the glorious revolution, to be subject to an international court on those things is ridiculous. We wouldn’t accept it in Australia.”

Howard said the Brexit vote was not a straightforward rejection of immigration but “a reaffirmation of the nation’s determination to decide, as I declared ... that we’ll decide who comes, the numbers, where they come from and the skills they bring with them”.

Howard famously said in a speech before the 2001 election, following the controversy over asylum seekers on board the Tampa, that “we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come”.

Howard said British people had felt a growing apprehension “that they don’t control their borders”, and a well-monitored and regulated immigration policy was the best way to maintain support for high levels of immigration.

“It was not unreasonable of people, it was not racist ... it was not xenophobic to say we want to keep an eye on the flow of immigration.”



He said commentary claiming Brexit was a working class revolt was “facile”, as a majority of Conservative voters had also voted to leave.

Howard said Brexit was a “dramatic reminder” of the need to keep in touch with “what people are thinking and feeling”, because both Labour and the Conservatives had failed to heed the “growing resentment” of the British people towards the EU.

Howard said if he was British, he would have voted to leave.

But Howard said Australia did not face the same issues because “we don’t have an EU ... we don’t have an issue which goes to our core sovereignty”. Nor did Australia have a “hollowing out of the middle class”, which was causing instability in the US.

Asked about Saturday’s election, Howard said he had not detected the “anger or studied indifference” that were prerequisites to defeat for the Coalition.

Howard said Turnbull had a double goal of achieving both re-election and sufficient Senate numbers to prevail in a joint sitting on two industrial relations bills.

He noted Labor’s primary vote in polls was 36%. “I don’t think you can win an election with a primary vote of 36%, even if you get an enormous flow, an unbelievable flow of Green preferences.

“My sense is the government will win and have the numbers to pass those bills at a joint sitting.”