Good cause, right? It’s the natural end point for Enlightenment thought - the defence of the right to seriously debate bigoted junk-science that irreparably damages tender youths. Perhaps that’s unfair. Hunt, during an interview with Radio National’s Patricia Karvelas, did make it clear he did not personally support gay conversion therapy, and that it was not federal government policy. The Minister for Health, Greg Hunt, complained about “this constant view that nobody, anywhere, is allowed to have a different view”. Credit:AAP Hunt is a reasonable and effective member of the frontbench, and was a vocal supporter of same-sex marriage (he even did a video with Ian Thorpe for the plebiscite), which makes it all the more perplexing that he chose to push the free speech button on this issue. Karvelas was questioning Hunt on gay conversion therapy because the Health Minister is a prominent Victorian Liberal, and the Victorian Liberal party had just ditched from its state conference agenda a motion for the law to be changed to ensure doctors “can offer counselling out of same-sex attraction or gender transitioning”.

Victorian federal MP Kevin Andrews is linked to the so-called “Menzies-Warrandyte” branch of the Young Liberals. Credit:Farfax Media The motion was brought by a sub-set of the Young Liberals called the “Menzies-Warrandyte” branch, which is linked to the hard-line Christian conservative Kevin Andrews. While making his own views known, Hunt added to Karvelas that he was concerned about “this constant view that nobody, anywhere, is allowed to have a different view”. “As a journalist, I would hope you believe in freedom of speech.” Karvelas said she did.

Loading Replay Replay video Play video Play video Hunt, fired up, then asked her: “What does freedom of speech mean to you?” and there followed a long, combative exchange where Hunt evaded the issue (ie whether or not he was alarmed elements of his party are promoting policy antithetical to the mental health of some of society’s most vulnerable) by badgering his interviewer over her adherence to liberal values. Free speech is often a political football, but using it as a political ram rod is new. This was not a free speech issue, it was a policy issue. As Health Minister, it is well within Hunt's portfolio. "I've answered your question, now you answer my question," Hunt said. "Will you just once answer a question from me? Your audience is listening, here's your chance. Or are you afraid to stand up for freedom of speech?"

Loading As Karvelas ended the interview, Hunt said it was “disappointing” she wouldn’t say what he wanted to her say, which did seem a bit un-free-speechy in itself. One of the most amusing things about the tactical deployment of the free speech issue by politicians is that they are some of the least free speakers possible. Everything they say passes through the radar of party messaging, media advisers and the calculus of self-interest before it is uttered. These are people who are literally given lines to say every day - lines written for them by staff members from the Prime Minister’s office.

If they veer off-message they get slapped back onto it - like Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack did this week when he said Scott Morrison was going to be Santa Claus come Budget time. Hunt’s motivations in going toe to toe with a journalist over free speech are opaque, but it seems he felt he was being railroaded into condemning the debate itself, rather than the policy in question. Perhaps, like many moderates on both sides of the political divide, Hunt has ants in his pants about what he sees as the creeping totalitarianism of the progressive left. If it’s the latter, he is probably joined by a reasonable number of Australians, even those who support progressive causes, who feel uneasy when someone such as Israel Folau gets pilloried for expressing what he’s been taught to believe, however wrong-headed. Hunt's office received a huge amount of positive feedback after the interview. We are at a critical juncture in progressive politics, where the rigid policing of ideas on which the majority of the public has been persuaded - for example same-sex marriage - has the potential to undo a lot of good work.

Loading The LGBTI lobby has led an enormously successful civil rights movement both in Australia and overseas. It’s been magnificent and exciting to live through, and it’s not over yet. Same-sex marriage, inconceivable less than a generation ago, is now legal in 27 countries. It directly affects a small percentage of the population, yet the majority of those populations was won over to support it. Most hardline conservatives would give the polo shirt off their back for that kind of grassroots success. With any political cause, the true battle is to change people’s minds, and part of that battle is accepting that some people’s minds will never be changed. Directing resources their way will only deplete you.