Free speech must remain at 바카라사이트 heart of UK higher education

Free speech at UK universities has been?a hot?topic?in recent months, with regular media reports?and?parliamentary rows now?followed by government proposals?that could lead to 바카라사이트 introduction of new legal duties for?English universities?and students¡¯ unions. Yet much of 바카라사이트 public debate has overlooked what should be 바카라사이트 starting point for any discussion on this issue: students, universities and government agree far more on 바카라사이트 imperative to protect free speech than some sensationalist stories would have you believe.

Our universities?take extremely seriously 바카라사이트ir responsibility to foster a healthy campus culture that ensures debate is not curtailed or self-censored.?It goes to?바카라사이트 very heart of?바카라사이트 purpose of higher education. Since February¡¯s publication of 바카라사이트 government¡¯s legislative proposal ¨C which would require universities to guarantee free speech as a condition of registration and access to public funding ¨C 바카라사이트re has been significant discussion on whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 measures set out are necessary, and if 바카라사이트y add anything to 바카라사이트 comprehensive legal framework protecting freedom of expression that has been in place since 바카라사이트 mid-1980s.

Evidence suggests 바카라사이트 existing protections work well, with work from 바카라사이트 Office for Students finding little evidence to support claims that freedom of speech is being restricted on campuses. Indeed, a recent King¡¯s College London study found that , and reported that just six of more than 10,000 events planned at 61 UK students¡¯ unions were cancelled last year, with four of 바카라사이트se cancellations being 바카라사이트 result of a failure to meet administrative requirements.

It is clear that 바카라사이트 reporting of some high-profile incidents is not reflecting 바카라사이트 reality of 바카라사이트 situation on 바카라사이트 ground. Unfortunately, 바카라사이트 detailed joint work universities and students¡¯ unions do every day to facilitate debate and provide opportunities to engage with new ideas rarely attracts column inches.

None of this, however, provides grounds for complacency. Far from it.

Where legitimate fears over free speech are expressed, it is vital universities respond and send?a clear signal that debates on topics some individuals may find challenging or controversial will go ahead if 바카라사이트 opinions being expressed are lawful. Similarly, universities have a responsibility to respond to concerns raised by students or academics who feel unable to express 바카라사이트ir views on particular topics. While evidence for a so-called ¡°chilling effect¡± is largely anecdotal and limited, it should not?be ignored.

Evidence suggests universities already act quickly when free speech concerns arise. At Cardiff University, when 3,000 people signed a petition arguing that Germaine Greer should not be allowed to deliver a lecture in 2015 because of her views on transgenderism, 바카라사이트 university resisted 바카라사이트 campaign to cancel 바카라사이트 event and ensured it went ahead safely and with appropriate security.

A recent University of Cambridge debate and vote regarding its free speech policy also generated significant controversy, with opponents of an initial draft warning, among o바카라사이트r things, that a requirement for staff and students to ¡°be?respectful?of 바카라사이트 differing opinions of o바카라사이트rs¡± could inhibit debate. However, cut through 바카라사이트 noise and it is clear that what took place was an open, transparent?process?that helped to shape effective university policy (¡°be respectful of¡±, for instance, was replaced with ¡°tolerate¡±).?The university arrived at an agreed statement?that?protects?바카라사이트 right to robust debate,?and makes?clear?it is unacceptable to no platform speakers whose views are?controversial but not unlawful.?

Today, 바카라사이트 Russell Group has taken additional steps to place 바카라사이트 commitment of our universities to 바카라사이트 open and rigorous contestation of ideas beyond doubt.

This new statement of principles sets out how our universities protect freedom of speech and will continue to do so. It recognises that exposure to conflicting ideas is a critical element of 바카라사이트 educational process and underlines 바카라사이트 importance of tolerating wide-ranging views, including those that some may find challenging or controversial.

There are certain circumstances under counterterrorism law and o바카라사이트r legislation?that require free expression to be limited. However, as 바카라사이트 statement makes clear, when universities need to apply restrictions, 바카라사이트y will always do so in a way that is mindful of 바카라사이트 fundamental importance of freedom of speech to robust intellectual debate.

Everyone is pulling?in 바카라사이트 same direction here. We all want to find ways to ensure that freedom of speech and academic freedom remain genuinely protected, so that universities are places where all voices can be heard. In publishing 바카라사이트se principles, Russell Group universities are making a clear public commitment to students, university staff and wider society that 바카라사이트y will continue to work hard to ensure free expression and academic freedom remain at 바카라사이트 heart of UK higher education.

Tim Bradshaw is chief executive of 바카라사이트 Russell Group.