The Education Secretary shelved the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act in part because British universities wanted to protect their commercial operations in authoritarian states such as China. The Telegraph has more.
Earlier this month, Bridget Phillipson halted the introduction of a law aimed at forcing universities to actively promote free speech on campus, just days before they were due to come into force.
She announced that she was shelving the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 – a flagship Tory policy – and she said she will now consider repealing it.
The Department for Education (DfE) said the Bill would have a “negative” impact on vulnerable groups and that it opened universities up to costly legal challenges from academics if they fell foul of the new law.
But legal documents, seen by the Telegraph, reveal that vice-chancellors’ fears that the law would cause difficulties for their relationships with authoritarian states were also considered.
Responding to a legal challenge from the Free Speech Union (FSU), government lawyers noted that “concerns” had been raised with them about the “consequences for delivering English [higher education] in foreign countries which have restrictions on free speech”.
Several British universities operate overseas campuses as a way to attract more international students, as well as boost opportunities for lucrative research partnerships.
According to the latest figures, 18 universities have 38 campuses in 18 countries, with China and Malaysia the most popular destinations, followed by Dubai and Singapore.
The Russell Group, which represents the country’s top universities, has previously warned of the difficulties institutions would face if they had to implement the new free speech law in their campuses overseas.
The legal document also refers to concerns about the “costs of overseas transparency requirements”, which would have required universities to declare donations from foreign countries, over a certain amount.
While experts believe this points to their fear that the transparency requirement may put off prospective donors, Universities UK, the vice-chancellor membership group, said this refers to the cost of filling in forms.
A spokesman for Universities U.K. said that its members are “strongly committed to free speech and to academic freedom and they are bound by law to uphold both”, but said that the free speech law would have made working with other countries more difficult.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: More than 500 academics, including Sir Niall Fergusson, have written to Bridget Phillipson asking her to implement the Freedom of Speech Act in full. The Mail has more.
Stop Press 2: The Free Speech Union has mounted a legal challenge against the Government, convinced that Bridget Phillipson’s decision to suspend the Act was unlawful. You can contribute to the legal costs of that judicial review here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.