While still refusing to release the report, the Prime Minister pledged to introduce legislation to remove this discriminatory right allowed to the religious schools. The Opposition Leader gave bipartisan support but went further and proposed that religious schools also lose the right to sack gay staff. The Prime Minister insisted that the two aspects were separate issues.

This is simply no way for a community to address a contentious issue nor for a parliament and government to make public policy. The Ruddock Review was always a political exercise in the context of the passing of same-sex marriage but, once set up and with the community consultation undertaken and the report submitted last May, surely the contents and conclusions needed to be treated with greater respect. Instead, there have been many losers.

The public has good reason to be outraged. We have been drip-fed the Prime Minister’s personal opinions on these matters since his elevation by the Liberals last month and fobbed off by responses that Cabinet had not yet discussed the report. But we have no way of knowing whether or not the report has had ministerial, departmental or inter-departmental consideration. It would be helpful to know.

Whatever the case, if informed open debate was called for surely the report should have been released immediately to facilitate better discussion. Such reports offer not just recommendations but useful summaries of the issues at stake and of the current legislative position at state and federal level. Without the report, few Australians have a firm grasp of the subject. Instead, the Prime Minister deflected calls to release the report, describing it not as a government report but a report to the government. Yet the government had shaped the review, appointed the reviewers and talked it up as likely to make a major contribution.

Like other governments on various issues, the Morrison government wanted above all to control the debate about religious freedom and to hide the report until it revealed its own plans. It had an internal political division between conservatives and liberals to manage as well as relations with the Nationals. It wanted to defer any announcements until well after the crucial Wentworth byelection and to then announce a fully-formed policy proposal. It could then try to sell its proposal to the public as the best and only response. It would only then release the report. This way of doing things was like putting the cart before the horse.

Now the horse has bolted. Once the report was leaked the government lost control and started making policy on the run. As Fairfax columnist and former Labor government adviser, Sean Kelly, has convincingly demonstrated, once public opinion polls revealed the public’s overwhelming distaste for the PM’s position, Morrison, followed by Bill Shorten, rushed to act. The political leaders quickly became followers.

Responsiveness is good but responding in a considered fashion rather than helter-skelter is surely better. The main stakeholders have been badly treated.

One can only guess what the committee itself, the expert panel, thinks of the way its work has been treated. They are substantial community figures who applied themselves conscientiously. Ruddock, a former Immigration minister, was joined by Emeritus Professor Rosalind Croucher, President of the Human Rights Commission, Dr Annabel Bennett, barrister and former judge, Fr Frank Brennan SJ, CEO of Catholic Social Services Australia, and Queensland Law Professor Nicholas Aroney. They received 15,500 submissions and held public sittings in each capital city, which is a considerable effort.

They have a right to feel miffed even though they are experienced enough to know that once a report to government has been submitted it is out of their hands. What has happened is business as usual in that regard. Their collective wisdom hasn’t been heard this week as they have maintained a professional silence because the politicians have taken over.

The LGBTIQ community, the subject of much of the debate, must feel carried along helplessly by the tumultuous turn of events over the last ten days after fearing they would be at risk from the political machinations over freedom of religion.

The religious communities have felt drawn to publicly correct the damage done to their reputations by an under-informed debate framed as secular Australia versus religious Australia. Religious school principals have defended themselves from the charge of wanting to eject gay students from their schools, while some church leaders remain silent extending protection to gay and lesbian staff as well as students.

The outcome remains in the balance. The end result may eventually include greater clarity and inclusiveness, at least as it applies to non-government schools and sexual identity. But the route we are taking leaves much to be desired. Community discussion would be better informed and policy-making would be more rational if the government immediately released the Ruddock report.

John Warhurst is an Emeritus Professor of Political Science at the Australian National University.