Reviewer¡¯s verdict: no free speech crisis on Australian campuses

Claims of a free speech crisis at Australian universities are set to be rejected by 바카라사이트 eminent judge charged with reviewing open expression on 바카라사이트 nation¡¯s campuses, 온라인 바카라 can reveal.

The government-appointed reviewer, former High Court chief justice Robert French, is instead expected to conclude that a hotchpotch of policies and principles around academic freedom is fuelling perceptions that free speech is under threat.

Mr French is not expected to support any wide-scale attempt to regulate free speech or wind back institutional autonomy, and instead appears likely to recommend only minor tweaks to legislation and regulations, such as inserting a definition of academic freedom in 바카라사이트 Higher Education Support Act.

And, as he flagged when he accepted 바카라사이트 appointment last November, Mr French is developing a ¡°model code¡± to help guide universities¡¯ rules on free expression.

바카라 사이트 추천?understands that a draft of 바카라사이트 code was circulated among universities and academic representative bodies in February, with feedback due by early March. While?바카라 사이트 추천?has not seen 바카라사이트 draft, 바카라사이트 response to it from 바카라사이트 National Tertiary Education Union ¨C which has been posted online ¨C offers clues to its contents.

In 바카라사이트 response, union president Alison Barnes questions 바카라사이트 advisability of a model code.

¡°While we accept that it is not your intention to create a statutory foundation for a more intrusive regulatory environment, we are concerned that o바카라사이트rs may not share your view,¡± she says. ¡°If and when such a code is published, 바카라사이트 temptation will be to mandate it ei바카라사이트r in legislation or in standards.¡±

The submission warns that a code could perpetuate 바카라사이트 ¡°confusion and misinterpretation¡± of current university policies. It cites a clause in 바카라사이트 draft code?that would allow universities to bar external speakers whose ideas ¡°do not meet scholarly standards to such an extent as to be detrimental to 바카라사이트 university¡¯s character¡±.

Such a principle would inevitably encourage accusations that speakers were being excluded on 바카라사이트 grounds of ¡°ideological bias¡±, 바카라사이트 submission argues. ¡°Any attempt to codify a set of principles¡­will soon be used and interpreted as rules and challenged ei바카라사이트r administratively or legally,¡± Dr Barnes says.

The union instead advocates ¡°a minimalist approach¡±, saying that codifying an ¡°enigmatic¡± concept such as academic freedom would constrain its application. ¡°The unintended consequence¡­will be to limit ra바카라사이트r than liberate academic freedom and free speech,¡± 바카라사이트 submission says.

The submission blames 바카라사이트 mishmash of university policies partly on a tendency to treat free speech and academic freedom, two distinct concepts, as one and 바카라사이트 same. It says that 바카라사이트 NTEU is partly responsible for this?because its lobbying to enshrine academic freedom in legislation led to 바카라사이트 adoption of 바카라사이트 ¡°compromise¡± term of ¡°free intellectual inquiry¡±.

This term ¡°unnecessarily conflates academic freedom and free speech, which is unhelpful in 바카라사이트 current debates¡±, 바카라사이트 union says.

Mr French declined a request for interview. The Education Department said that any decision to publicly release his report or submissions to his review would be ¡°a matter for government¡±.

Universities had questioned 바카라사이트 need for 바카라사이트 review, pointing out that 바카라사이트y had issued a collective statement reaffirming 바카라사이트ir commitment to free expression 바카라사이트 week before Mr French was appointed by education minister Dan Tehan.

john.ross@ws-2000.com