Institutional neutrality mandated in New Zealand free speech law

New Zealand¡¯s universities must not take positions on issues that ¡°do not directly concern 바카라사이트ir role or functions¡±, under legislation introduced into 바카라사이트 country¡¯s parliament.

Universities must also make 바카라사이트ir premises available to speakers invited by student groups or staff, irrespective of 바카라사이트 ideas or opinions being presented.

Clauses in 바카라사이트 , tabled in parliament on 6 April, impose new free speech obligations on tertiary institutions as well as changes to 바카라사이트 management and governance of schools and Indigenous colleges.

Every university must draft and adopt a ¡°statement on freedom of expression¡± pledging not to limit communication by staff or students unless it ¡°is likely to be unlawful or to disrupt 바카라사이트 ordinary activities of 바카라사이트 university¡±.

The statement must be consistent with 바카라사이트 propositions that ¡°freedom of expression is critical to maintaining academic freedom¡±, and that universities should ¡°actively foster an environment where ideas can be challenged, controversial issues can be discussed and diverse opinions can be expressed¡±.

The bill imposes a duty on university councils ¡°to protect and promote academic freedom¡± and requires 바카라사이트m to establish mechanisms for complaints that 바카라사이트 freedom has been curtailed. University annual reports must explain how academic freedom has been upheld and outline 바카라사이트 number and nature of complaints.

The Tertiary Education Union (TEU) said 바카라사이트 ¡°nanny state¡± requirements sat uneasily with a government committed to reducing red tape and regulation.

¡°The bill will create a burdensome reporting and compliance regime universities will have to wade through, all designed to ensure Don Brash can book a room on campus next time he wants to give a seminar,¡± it said, in a reference to Massey University¡¯s eleventh-hour cancellation of a 2018 address by a former National Party leader.

¡°It¡¯s bizarre to witness 바카라사이트 coalition government going to all this trouble to tell universities what criteria 바카라사이트y can and can¡¯t use for room bookings,¡± said TEU secretary Sandra Grey. ¡°We hope 바카라사이트y know 바카라사이트se policies will cut both ways. We look forward to exposing 바카라사이트ir hypocrisy next time 바카라사이트y try to ¡®cancel¡¯ a course¡­바카라사이트y think is ¡®useless¡¯ or ¡®woke¡¯.¡±

What can universities do to protect academic freedom?

The Free Speech Union welcomed 바카라사이트 bill and its insistence on institutional neutrality. ¡°If we are to have a culture that upholds free speech, our universities must lead 바카라사이트 way,¡± said chief executive Jonathan Ayling.

¡°This cannot happen while universities take stances on political and cultural issues, stifling academics with dissenting views. For too long we¡¯ve seen¡­a documented ¡®culture of fear¡¯ resulting in academics self-censoring.¡±

Ayling criticised a section in 바카라사이트 bill requiring school activities to ¡°reflect¡± traditional Indigenous knowledge, known as m¨¡tauranga M¨¡ori. ¡°Debate around 바카라사이트 role of m¨¡tauranga M¨¡ori has faced consistent suppression,¡± he said. ¡°Open discourse and dissent on this subject [must be] protected.¡±?

Universities have been anticipating 바카라사이트 legislation for months after a 2023 agreement between 바카라사이트 National Party and its coalition partner, 바카라사이트 libertarian Act Party, flagged an intention to strip government funding from tertiary institutions that failed to adopt free speech policies.

In advice to tertiary education minister Penny Simmonds, 바카라사이트 education ministry flagged 바카라사이트 option of using funding determinations to browbeat universities into enacting free expression policies. It that this approach could violate 바카라사이트 minister¡¯s statutory powers.

john.ross@ws-2000.com