[ad_1]
Former Conservative Education Secretary Justine Greening has poured cold water on government proposals designed to strengthen the protection of free speech on England’s university campuses.
The plans, which were revealed Tuesday by one of his successors, Gavin Williamson, include the appointment of an “advocate for free speech and academic freedom” to investigate possible infractions, as well as new legislation to assist academics, aggrieved visiting students or speakers seek redress through the courts.
Commenting on the proposals, Greening, who was secretary of education between 2016 and 2018, appeared to ignore warnings from the government about a free speech crisis in universities. She told The Guardian: “Freedom of expression is vitally important and, in my experience, as engines for debating ideas and points of view, our universities are already playing a vital role in defending it.”
Another former education secretary, Labor David Blunkett, who held the portfolio between 1997 and 2001, accused the government of using a mallet to break some nuts. “If there is a small problem, and I think there is, fixing it should be entirely up to the university and the student unions.”
When asked why he thought the government had taken the approach it did, Lord Blunkett said: “It is about identity politics. They have detected a problem that resonates with the electorate and they have decided to exploit it ”.
Blunkett’s successor, Estelle Morris (2001-02) added: “Yeah, I think there is a problem. It needs to be addressed, but [the government’s approach] It seems incredibly bureaucratic and heavy-handed. It seems that they have taken all the weapons out of the closet at once.
“It is about seeking a change in behavior and attitudes. These things are really difficult to legislate. I have a feeling that the battle for hearts and minds must be won before going in as hard as this. “
Another former Secretary of Education, the conservative Kenneth Baker (1986-89) gave cautious endorsement of the measures, but said he would have preferred universities to take care of it themselves. “I think it is very sad that a measure like this should be taken, but there is no doubt that there have been no platforms in some universities.”
The high profile chairman of the Commons education committee, Robert Halfon, said: “I think it’s a good idea. There are too many instances of non-platforms or obstacles placed to stop legitimate debate and discussion.
“As long as the laws are not broken, universities should be a haven for debating policies, policies or ideas, no matter how unpleasant or unpleasant some may find them. We need more Voltaire – ‘I don’t approve of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’ – in our higher education. “
Among the government’s proposals is a new condition of freedom of expression in universities so that they can register and access public funds, while the Office of Students (OfS), the regulator of higher education in England, would have the power to impose fines on institutions if they breach the condition.
The new legal duties will extend to student unions for the first time and will mean that they too will have to take steps to ensure legal freedom of expression for visiting members and speakers. According to the plans, universities would be legally bound to actively promote freedom of expression.
Skepticism persists in the higher education sector. David Bell, Vice Chancellor of the University of Sunderland and former Permanent Secretary of the Department of Education, said: “We have not been given any idea of the magnitude of the problem that this proposal seeks to address. Without that, it’s tempting to think of this as a major overreaction. “
Another vice-chancellor, who did not want to be named, warned: “They are obviously trying to wage a culture war, but all they will do is turn young people even more against them.”
