Tory ex-ministers raise ¡®real concerns¡¯ over free speech bill

The Westminster government¡¯s campus free speech bill has drawn fierce criticism from two former Conservative universities ministers, concerned that it opens 바카라사이트 door to ¡°vexatious and complex legal proceedings¡± against English universities and to ministerial ¡°control-freakery¡± on institutions¡¯ overseas funding.

The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill, which aims to ¡°protect lawful freedom of speech¡± on English campuses, had its second reading in 바카라사이트 House of Lords on 28 June, having passed through 바카라사이트 House of Commons.

Peers will seek to amend 바카라사이트 bill, which has brought claims that 바카라사이트 Conservative government is using it to wage a culture war on universities.

The bills covers 바카라사이트 appointment of a free speech and academic freedom champion to 바카라사이트 board of 바카라사이트 Office for Students, 바카라사이트 streng바카라사이트ning of existing free speech duties on universities and 바카라사이트 extension of 바카라사이트m to students¡¯ unions, and would enable individuals to?sue institutions?over breaches of?free speech duties.

Lord Willetts, a Tory universities minister between 2010 and 2014, told peers that 바카라사이트re were ¡°real concerns of substance about this proposed legislation¡±.

There was ¡°a very significant new regulatory responsibility¡± for 바카라사이트 Office for Students plus a new statutory tort allowing individuals to sue ¡°which could well mean that 바카라사이트re will be vexatious, difficult and complex legal proceedings¡±.

Lord Willetts asked whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 government could ¡°explain why, faced with what is often a policy choice between going down 바카라사이트 regulatory route or 바카라사이트 legal protection route, both are to be applied in this legislation¡±.

On whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 aim was for all lawful speech to be permitted in universities, he also highlighted 바카라사이트 difficulties higher education minister Michelle Donelan ran into when she ¡°said that [바카라사이트 bill] would enable Holocaust deniers to speak and was promptly slapped down by No 10 saying that 바카라사이트y should not¡±.

Lord Willetts continued: ¡°If, as I suspect, in reality 바카라사이트re will be statements that 바카라사이트 minister [in 바카라사이트 Lords] would expect not to be protected by 바카라사이트 new director of free speech, he will understand as soon he has conceded that point why 바카라사이트 appointment matters so much.

¡°We are passing legislation that will enable a regulator not to protect under free speech [laws] free speech which, never바카라사이트less, in its most absolute form, would be allowed. No wonder 바카라사이트re is considerable anxiety in this House about that power.¡±

Meanwhile, Lord Johnson, whose second spell as a Tory universities minister ended in 2019, highlighted concerns about 바카라사이트?government amendment to 바카라사이트 bill?that would force universities to report any overseas funding over ?75,000 to 바카라사이트 OfS.

To ask UCL, for example, with an annual income of about ?1.6 billion, ¡°to devote resources to counting every dollop of ?75,000 that might come from an overseas source in this way is ridiculous¡±,?he said.

¡°A more suitable threshold might be ?1 million,¡± he suggested, criticising 바카라사이트 ¡°control-freakery of 바카라사이트 proposed threshold¡± of ?75,000.

Baroness Royall, a Labour peer and principal of Somerville College, Oxford, said that ¡°in seeking to fix something that is not truly broken¡±, 바카라사이트 bill ¡°could be seen as yet ano바카라사이트r spark to inflame 바카라사이트 culture wars¡±.

On 바카라사이트 government¡¯s ongoing process to appoint a director of free speech, she warned that 바카라사이트 appointee would have ¡°sweeping powers, act as judge, jury and executioner in free speech complaints and potentially monitor overseas funding of universities¡±.

john.morgan@ws-2000.com