• Login
  • Register
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result

An Open Letter to a Midwit Labour MP on Why the Freedom of Speech Act is Not a ‘Tory Hate Speech Charter’

by Toby Young
13 October 2024 1:00 PM

Oxford law don Julius Grower has written an open letter in the Critic to Mark Ferguson, a midwit Labour MP who said in last week’s House of Commons debate about the free speech crisis afflicting English universities that the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act which Labour has refused to implement is “a charter for Hizb ut-Tahrir, Holocaust deniers and vaccine deniers to wander our universities freely”.

Here’s how it begins:

My name is Julius Grower, and I am an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Oxford. I am writing to you having seen your contribution to the debate around the urgent question, asked today in the House of Commons, about freedom of speech in universities.

Towards the end of your remarks, you said: “Would my honourable friend [the Minister] agree with me that the party opposite’s position is in fact a charter for Hizb ut-Tahrir, Holocaust deniers, and vaccine deniers to wander our universities freely?”

I am afraid that your comments show a profound misunderstanding of the nature of the law upon which you commented, which I feel compelled to correct. You may very well have reasons for supporting the Government’s (I think, woeful) decision — condemned so far by over 650 academics, including 7 Nobel Prize laureates and a Fields Medallist — to pause the implementation of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023. But the reasons you expressed today are fundamentally flawed ones. It is incumbent on you to do better

1. It is not a Tory charter

By the end of its time in Parliament, and, in particular, by the time it was being debated in great detail in the House of Lords, the then Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill had received, in principle, cross-party support. If you are in any doubt as to that fact, you should speak with Lord Collins of Highbury, who was the relevant Labour shadow minister in the Lords at that time.

2. It does not protect Holocaust denial

The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 does not purport to change the scope of the law on what is free to be said in English and Welsh universities. This point was expressly raised a number of times in the House of Lords, and was expressly responded to by the (then) Government. No one has seriously suggested otherwise since. Indeed, if you need confirmation of that, please read Akua Reindorf KC’s article in the Times Higher Education supplement. No lawyer has, as far as I am aware, suggested that she is wrong in saying what she has.

The definition of freedom of speech in the Act is expressly said to be that covered by Article 10(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (as incorporated into English law by the Human Rights Act 1998). Article 10(1) is plainly and uncontrovertibly qualified by Article 10(2) and by Article 17. Furthermore, Article 17 has been interpreted by the courts, including the European Court of Human Rights, as specifically excluding Holocaust denial from the right to any legal protection. Again, please see Reindorf KC’s article if you need confirmation of this. Ms Reindorf is an Equality and Human Rights Commissioner and an expert in equality and human rights law. She is correct in what she says.

Incidentally, although I do not think I should have to say this in order for my points to be taken seriously, it seems appropriate to make clear that I myself am Jewish, and am acutely aware of the problems of anti-semitism on our campuses. However, I believe that the solution to that issue is to give effect to legislation which will more effectively allow Jews and Zionists to hold their own events on campuses, and stop them from being closed down by murky threats made by mobs. Unfortunately, as we have just seen with Suella Braveman’s cancelled talk in Cambridge, this is precisely what is happening under the current (unreformed) regulatory regime.

3. It does not protect Hizb ut-Tahrir’s speech

It is not wholly clear from your remarks what you meant by the law being a “charter” for Hizb ut-Tahrir. Clearly it is not legislation which alters the fact that Hizb ut-Tahrir is a proscribed organisation. I assume therefore that you meant that the Act would cover – and allow for the promotion of – Hizb ut-Tahrir’s ideology. This is, once again, entirely false. Expressing support for Hizb ut-Tahrir, and spreading or supporting their hateful ideology, is a criminal offence. People can go to prison for doing so. As said above, nothing about the 2023 Act changed (or even purported to change) the scope of what can and cannot be said as a matter of English law, whether within or without universities. Section 1(2) of the Act refers to “freedom of speech within the law”. The key words there are: “within the law”. Praising/expressing support for/promoting the propaganda of a terrorist organisation is unlawful speech and thus not covered by the Act. Even if you are not a lawyer, this should, I’m afraid, have been obvious to you upon even a cursory reading of the legislation.

Worth reading in full.

Stop Press: A leading academic had to leave his post as head of a department at Kings College London and emigrate to Australia because he wrote a pro-Brexit article. The Mail has more.

Stop Press 2: Suella Braverman has warned that the cancellation of her speaking event at Cambridge is symptomatic of a wider free speech crisis in our universities. The Sunday Times has more.

Tags: Free SpeechHigher Education (Freedom of Speech) ActHizb ut-TahrirHolocaust DenialLabour GovernmentMark Ferguson

Donate

We depend on your donations to keep this site going. Please give what you can.

Donate Today

Comment on this Article

You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.

Sign Up
Previous Post

The EU’s Pathetic Efforts at Schools Propaganda

Next Post

Labour’s Poll Lead Wiped Out

Subscribe
Login
Notify of
Please log in to comment

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.

29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
9 months ago

Another bloody thick Labour MP looking to gain favour with Kneel in the hope and expectation of a lift up the sleazy pole.

Thank you and well done to Professor Julius Grower for giving this no-mark some basic lessons around our laws and their application. It would be encouraging if more people in positions of some clout could emulate the Professor. Too many MP’s appear to believe that spouting any old nonsense is somehow acceptable simply because they have a temporary, taxpayer funded residence in the House of Commons. It is not and only hi-lights yet again the woeful quality of the political class.

It might be encouraging if Mark Ferguson could find the manners and courage to accept Professor Grower’s admonishment and issue a public apology but as we all know this is not how these grifters operate. Still, kudos to Professor Grower.

15
0
Jonathan M
Jonathan M
9 months ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

“Another bloody thick Labour MP”
That seems to be a requirement for employment for Labour MPs these days. A brief look back at former Labour MPs and Ministers, for some of whom I have the greatest respect despite disagreeing with their politics, would show just how low they have fallen.
Mind you, the Tories aren’t a great deal better and the Limp Dums are just a sick joke.

Last edited 9 months ago by Jonathan M
6
0
Grim Ace
Grim Ace
9 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan M

Our MPs have become less intelligent since at least the 1950s. We are collapsing intellectually as a nation. I think we may be done for. The thickest breed the most, and the intelligent thr least. Women are either not breeding and focusing on their (mostly pointless) career, and/or murdering their babies by having abortions. What a God awful pass we have come to.

5
-1
Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
9 months ago

Without free-speech there can be no real freedom. A point which the Anti-white Party (aka the Labour Party) understands only too well.

13
0
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
9 months ago

Depressingly defensive letter which doesn’t really advocate for freedom of speech, which very few people actually believe in. They just say they do.

5
-3
paul6316
paul6316
9 months ago
Reply to  transmissionofflame

Thank you. This Julius Grower is midwittier than the MP in question.

4
-1
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
9 months ago
Reply to  paul6316

He ought to read up on Brandenburg v. Ohio – Wikipedia to see what actual freedom of speech used to mean to lawyers, who no doubt all found the speech in question very distasteful but nevertheless could find no justification in law for its prohibition.

3
0
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
9 months ago
Reply to  transmissionofflame

Seems like not all DS readers believe in freedom of speech either.

2
-2
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
9 months ago

“Vaccine deniers”. Given how many people have been needlessly harmed by the products marketed as “covid vaccines”, at great cost to the taxpayer, under duress, including vulnerable old people and innocent children, because of claims made for these “vaccines” WHICH NOT EVEN THE MANUFACTURERS MADE, that is a despicable remark.

9
0
Mogwai
Mogwai
9 months ago
Reply to  transmissionofflame

Yes it’s just another example of ‘othering’ and disparaging the people who don’t conform to the official narrative, or who question or challenge the prescribed way of thinking. ”Climate deniers/far right extremists/Islamophobes/transphobes” etc etc, I think I must tick all of those boxes, according to the Leftards’ intolerant and authoritarian attitudes. And as long as there is this pervading intolerance towards people who don’t conform and continue to challenge/oppose/question the various agendas pushed by governments etc then there can never truly be free speech, can there? Otherwise there wouldn’t be this obsession by ‘TPTB’ to censor the hell out of everyone who dissents. It’s why the likes of Elon Musk has become ‘Public Enemy Number 1’ in their eyes, since taking over Twitter, because for all their money, power and influence, as long as he owns the world’s biggest platform which supports freedom of speech, they can’t do jack shit.

10
0
Atticus
Atticus
9 months ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Yep, I think that I also tick all the boxes. I didn’t use to because they did not really exist until the demented followers of Derrida, Châtelet, Lyotard, Gramsci et al invented them. I think that referring to Ferguson as a midwit is being overly generous; as I said yesterday, I do believe that we are now governed by the feeble minded.

9
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
9 months ago
Reply to  Atticus

At least Mussolini had Gramsci banged up, if nothing else apart from the Busses of course.

3
0
Mogwai
Mogwai
9 months ago

Just another teacher being persecuted for asking a valid question in class, highlighting the state of education nowadays but also how one particular religion is seemingly beyond reproach. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of the OSCE, so this explains a lot;

”Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has become a symbol of the fight for free speech in Europe. Known for her unwavering stance on the dangers posed by Islam to the West, she faced persecution not just from the Austrian government but from the European Court of Human Rights, all for merely asking an uncomfortable yet factual question in a private class she taught. Her conviction raises serious concerns about the future of free expression and the increasingly oppressive landscape created by political correctness.

In one of her classes, Elisabeth brought up a historical fact: Mohammad, the founder of Islam, married a six-year-old girl, Aisha, and consummated that marriage when she was nine. She then posed a question to her students: “What would we call such a man in the West?” It was an honest and valid inquiry, yet it led to her being targeted by a leftist newspaper, which sent a spy to her class in an effort to silence her through cancel culture.
The courts of Austria, rather than protecting her right to free speech, twisted the situation against her. In a particularly bizarre ruling, a female judge argued that since Mohammad remained married to Aisha past the age of puberty, he could not be labeled a pedophile.

This, despite the fact that Elisabeth never explicitly made that claim—she simply asked her class a question based on historical facts. Her appeal was consistently rejected by higher courts, and the case made its way to the European Union Commission of Human Rights, where, once again, her voice was stifled.
Elisabeth’s ordeal is part of a larger pattern, where truth is increasingly branded as hate speech by globalist entities like the OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe), which aims to suppress free speech under the guise of protecting harmony. The OSCE, comprised of 57 participating states, is pivotal in shaping legislation that impacts free speech across Europe.

The OSCE itself is a post-Cold War organization with the original intention of helping former Soviet states adapt to freedom and free market economies. Like many other institutions, the polarity has been reversed, and it appears to be doing the exact opposite now, injecting socialist doctrine and ideology, such as political correctness, into Western nations.
Figures like Stephen Coughlin have pointed out these manipulative tactics in international forums, including the OSCE itself, where uncomfortable truths are silenced to promote a certain narrative.”

https://rairfoundation.com/silenced-truth-how-globalist-forces-osce-are-crushing/

10
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
9 months ago
Reply to  Mogwai

” She then posed a question to her students: “What would we call such a man in the West?”……I will answer that for her by simply pointing out that around the time of that Warlord, people in many parts of the World married during or just past puberty. But I defend her free speech and she should not be persecuted like that.

Last edited 9 months ago by Ron Smith
1
-2
Arum
Arum
9 months ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

While I agree with you that we shouldn’t judge historical figures by current standards, the gentleman in question is more than a mere historical figure (or is regarded as more than a mere historical figure by some).

5
0
Marque1
Marque1
9 months ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

Puberty was much delayed in those times due to relatively poor nutrition. Still, even if it was not, 9 is still rather too young.

Last edited 9 months ago by Marque1
1
0
Grim Ace
Grim Ace
9 months ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Also remember Mark Towler who is in jail for posting the truth using stickers. We live in a vile dictatorship tham suppresses the truth about the damage that the establishment is doing to our people through mass immigration from thick hole countries.

2
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
9 months ago

“It does not protect Holocaust denial”

Why should that be excluded from the principle of free speech Toby?

5
-1
Heretic
Heretic
9 months ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

Exactly. Wasn’t some 80-year-old German woman thrown into prison recently for expressing her views denying the Holocaust?

Is HOLODOMOR Denial also excluded from the principle of Free Speech by Article 17, I wonder? You know, where 12 Million Ukrainian Christians were starved to death in one year by Jewish Bolsheviks for refusing to give up their family farms to the Communist Collective?

4
0
RW
RW
9 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

95 years, as you’re probably referring to Ursula Haverbeck. She got sentenced to 1 year in prison without probation for claiming that Auschwitz was a forced labour and not an extermination camp.

Last edited 9 months ago by RW
2
0
Heretic
Heretic
9 months ago
Reply to  RW

Incredible! Not only because of her age, but because they are treating her as if she were one of the actual Nazi prison guards, instead of just a pensioner expressing an opinion!!!

And a forced labour camp is a Slave Labour Camp, but no, that’s not sufficiently evil for the fanatics— it must be “extermination and gas chambers” following the prescribed narrative.

How did the world become so completely cowed by one small group?

2
0
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
9 months ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

Exactly

People say they believe in freedom of speech but it’s usually just the case that they want speech they agree with to be allowed, and they are not too bothered if other stuff they consider horrid is banned

6
0
JXB
JXB
9 months ago

Toby Young: waste of time. If the addresses was capable of understanding anything you wrote, he wouldn’t have made his remarks in the first place.

We live in a dark age of lack or reason and rationale, no ability for critical analysis, low grade thinking, intellectual poverty, ignorance, pathological lying – and that’s the people in Government, political class and running our institutions.

6
0
EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
9 months ago

I wonder why the term midwit was used. I would have thought that halfwit would have been generous.

Last edited 9 months ago by Hardliner
5
0
RW
RW
9 months ago

This is not worth reading at all because internal squabbles among the people who believe censorship is crucial for the protection of society from “harmful speech” about what precisely is or isn’t “harmful speech” are thoroughly uninteresting. Nobody ever expected as much as two, let alone even three people to agree on that.

Both Julius Gower and Mark Ferguson agree in principle that there’s harmful speech and that the state should pro- or persecute those who dare to ‘speech’ harmful stuff. Unsurprisingly, Gower doesn’t think his own opinions should ever be considered harmful speech. Ferguson doesn’t necessarily want to concede this point. Gower is some academic windbag, Ferguson a MP with political power. Ergo: Ferguson will likely prevail.

Whatever.

For an example how much different opinions about historical events actually differ:

Wikipedia claims that the 3rd OHL (Hindenburg/ Ludendorff, August 1916 – October 1918) had erected a military dictatorship in Germany. This is a ridiculous claim, as can be easily gathered from contemporary German sources which chronicle the parliamentary fights over domestic war policy and how the war was to be terminated. Eg, Ludendorff writes about the so-called Hilfdienstgesetzt (auxiliary service law):

A law with many a great many paragraphs was created which didn’t impose any duties on industry workers but gave a lot of (new) rights to them and pretty much forced them under the umbrella of the SPD-dominated unions. The union-led arbitration tribunals got near unlimited powers. Their power was so domineering that individual workers were forced to associate themselves with these unions and to become members of the SPD in order to remain able to make a living.
[Ludendorff, Kriegführung und Politik, p. 121, translation by me]

That a so-called European court has the power to decree what does and doesn’t constitute a legal opinion about historical events not only categorically means that there is no such thing as free speech in Europe but should also give rise to some very grave suspcisions: What skeletons have the people who’ve been engineering this for the last 8 decades in their closets they’re still trying to hide so badly?

Last edited 9 months ago by RW
6
0
Grim Ace
Grim Ace
9 months ago

Labour are cretinous communists. And, free speechnis absolute or it is not free speech. Let mental Arab groups spout their bullshine. They can be countered with alternative, robust points of view.

Last edited 9 months ago by Grim Ace
2
0
Richard Austin
Richard Austin
9 months ago

There is only one reason Labour have blocked this Bill, which is illegal to do since it had already passed through Parliament and the Lords: they want Jews silenced. That is it, pure and simple, they have not changed in the slightest, they are still Antisemitic. The fact that not introducing it allows Tories to also be silenced is a happy by-product for them.

1
0
coviture2020
coviture2020
9 months ago

Are banter bouncers and the freedom of speech in higher education act cancellation aligned?

1
0
James Newing
James Newing
9 months ago

Good article Toby and thanks for standing up for this important bill Julian. The radical left hate free speech, as it exposes their bankrupt ideology to scrutiny, plain and simple. Our freedoms are under assault and we need to do all we can to protect them – thanks to Daily Sceptic and all the contributors for being part of that push back.

2
0

NEWSLETTER

View today’s newsletter

To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

DONATE

PODCAST

The Sceptic | Episode 45: Jack Hadfield on the Anti-Asylum Protests, Alan Miller on the Tyranny of Digital ID and James Graham on the Net Zero Pension Threat

by Richard Eldred
25 July 2025
0

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

News Round-Up

27 July 2025
by Will Jones

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

27 July 2025
by Laura Perrins

Solar Panel Fault Known a Year Before School Fire

26 July 2025
by Will Jones

Gas is Dirt Cheap. Only Politicians Make Energy Expensive

27 July 2025
by Ben Pile

Gradually, Then Suddenly: The Death Throes of a Regime

25 July 2025
by Dr David McGrogan

Ozzy Osbourne, Oasis of Heavy Metal

36

Elite Police Squad to Monitor Anti-Migrant Posts on Social Media

18

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

16

News Round-Up

14

Taliban Fighters ‘Brought to UK on Airlifts’ After Afghan Data Breach

12

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

27 July 2025
by Laura Perrins

Gas is Dirt Cheap. Only Politicians Make Energy Expensive

27 July 2025
by Ben Pile

Ozzy Osbourne, Oasis of Heavy Metal

26 July 2025
by James Alexander

Oh-So Biased Public Broadcasting

26 July 2025
by Dr James Allan

Is the US Losing the World to China?

26 July 2025
by Noah Carl

POSTS BY DATE

October 2024
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
« Sep   Nov »

SOCIAL LINKS

Free Speech Union

NEWSLETTER

View today’s newsletter

To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

POSTS BY DATE

October 2024
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
« Sep   Nov »

DONATE

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

News Round-Up

27 July 2025
by Will Jones

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

27 July 2025
by Laura Perrins

Solar Panel Fault Known a Year Before School Fire

26 July 2025
by Will Jones

Gas is Dirt Cheap. Only Politicians Make Energy Expensive

27 July 2025
by Ben Pile

Gradually, Then Suddenly: The Death Throes of a Regime

25 July 2025
by Dr David McGrogan

Ozzy Osbourne, Oasis of Heavy Metal

36

Elite Police Squad to Monitor Anti-Migrant Posts on Social Media

18

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

16

News Round-Up

14

Taliban Fighters ‘Brought to UK on Airlifts’ After Afghan Data Breach

12

Hate Crime Okay, If Not by a White Man?

27 July 2025
by Laura Perrins

Gas is Dirt Cheap. Only Politicians Make Energy Expensive

27 July 2025
by Ben Pile

Ozzy Osbourne, Oasis of Heavy Metal

26 July 2025
by James Alexander

Oh-So Biased Public Broadcasting

26 July 2025
by Dr James Allan

Is the US Losing the World to China?

26 July 2025
by Noah Carl

SOCIAL LINKS

Free Speech Union
  • Home
  • About us
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy

Facebook

  • X

Instagram

RSS

Subscribe to our newsletter

© Skeptics Ltd.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In

© Skeptics Ltd.

wpDiscuz
You are going to send email to

Move Comment
Perfecty
Do you wish to receive notifications of new articles?
Notifications preferences