Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims.
Free speech law to stop university cancel culture watered down by No 10
Government rows back over Bill designed to protect speakers after lobbying by Tory peers
A free speech law designed to prevent universities from cancelling controversial speakers has been watered down, The Telegraph can reveal.
The Government has made concessions to universities over new powers it had drawn up to enable academics and students to sue institutions for breaching their free speech rights.
It has tabled amendments that would require academics and students to only seek compensation in the courts as a last resort, after first pursuing complaints through the procedures of the relevant university and the higher education regulator.
Claimants would also have to prove they had suffered a loss.
It follows lobbying by Tory peers, who argued that the law would cause universities to face huge costs. However, others in the party are furious at the perceived weakening of the support for free speech.
It is understood that Kemi Badenoch, the equalities minister, is concerned about any attempts to dilute the protections in the Bill.
Prof Jo Phoenix, a professor of criminology who quit the Open University after she said it failed to protect her right to free speech in the face of attacks by transgender activists, said the amendments were “horrendous”.
“To now think that I would have to go through a lengthy complaints process, well let’s just say that this process is an excellent way that university managers can kick the problem in our universities into the long grass,” she said.
The law to protect free speech at universities was announced by Sir Gavin Williamson, the former education secretary, early last year following a string of rows over the so-called “cancellation” of academics and students over their views.
They include Dr Heather Brunskell-Evans, who was no-platformed by university students at King’s College London after she discussed transgender issues on a radio show, and Prof John Finnis, an Oxford law professor who faced calls to be removed from his post because of his views on homosexuality.
Prof Kathleen Stock, a philosophy professor, resigned from Sussex University after what she described as a "witch-hunt" because of her views on transgender issues.
Baroness Barran, parliamentary under secretary of state at the Department for Education, wrote to peers on Wednesday saying the amendments to statutory tort - which gives academics new powers to sue universities in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill - had been tabled after the Government had "listened carefully" to arguments in the Lords.
On Thursday, the Government insisted it remained committed to free speech and said suggestions that the Bill was being watered down were "nonsense".
A spokesman said: "All the core provisions of the Bill remain as they have always been, to strengthen protections for freedom of speech in higher education. It was always our intention that the tort would be used as a last resort."
The Bill has retained powers to create a new "director for freedom of speech and academic freedom" role in the Office for Students, who will oversee a free complaints scheme.
Ministers urged to 'hold their nerve'
Sir John Hayes, the Tory MP who chairs the Common Sense Group and scrutinised the Bill in the House of Commons, said he will “appeal to ministers to hold their nerve in the defence of free speech”.
He said: “I had already warned the Secretary of State and ministers about the risk of diluting the Bill and it would be profoundly disappointing if the Government capitulated to the forces of darkness, particularly at a time when the assault on free speech has been highlighted by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie in The Reith Lectures.”
Ms Adichie, the Nigerian author, warned this week that she worries that society is suffering from an "epidemic of self-censorship".
Lord Moylan, the Conservative peer, said the amendments would detract from “one of the only effective measures that the Bill contains for the protection of academics and for the protection of freedom of expression”.
The amendments follow opposition to the Bill in the House of Lords from peers including Lord Willetts, the former Conservative universities minister, who said the creation of a new statutory tort enabling academics to sue universities “risks duplicating functions of the Office for Students and imposing unnecessary additional costs on universities”.
The Russell Group had urged the Government to either remove the tort or amend the legislation to ensure complaints procedures with the Office for Students are “exhausted” before civil claims are pursued.
It argued this would ensure the new laws add a “genuinely additional layer of protection for individuals with free speech concerns who have suffered a loss”.
Presently, academics and students can seek a judicial review if their rights are violated - but this costs hundreds of thousands of pounds, which is not viable for most professors or students.
The amendments have been tabled before the Bill returns to the House of Lords next week for its report stage.
'Shattering blow' to protecting free speech
Dr Julius Grower, an associate law professor at Oxford University, said the amendments were a “shattering blow to the cause of protecting academic free speech”.
He said: “It will be hard for academics whose academic freedom is violated to show pecuniary loss. One will not be factually worse off by being forced to stay home and watch the telly rather than travelling somewhere to give a talk.
“Consequently, the number of academic freedom violations which this clause will end up protecting is minimal. But non-platforming and cancellations will continue.”
Toby Young, founder of the Free Speech Union, said: “If the Government amends the Bill so students and academics are only able to take their universities to the county court for breaching their free speech duties after exhausting every other avenue, it will neuter it.”
A government spokesman said: “The Office for Students will be able to impose sanctions, including fines, on any university that fails in its duty to protect their students, staff and visiting speakers.
“Should individuals wish to seek further action after exploring other available routes, they can still bring a claim to the courts.”
Source: The Telegraph
No comments:
Post a Comment