The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill has reached committee stage in the House of Lords. This means that after much debate, peers now have the opportunity to propose amendments to the Bill. The FSU has been monitoring amendments put forward and these are our top 3... 
1⃣ Lord Moylan’s amendment which provides a definition to the phrase “#freedomofspeech within the law” which is premised on common law philosophy: freedom = anything that isn’t expressly prohibited. Lord Hope would outsource the job of defining the phrase to Strasbourg.
It is better to have a clear, certain and strong definition of #freespeech — Moylan’s amendment does just that, even spelling out what is expressly prohibited (including Holocaust denial) and clarifies the relationship between free speech and other legal obligations.
2⃣ Lord Strathcarron’s amendment which seeks to preserve key #academicfreedom protections — including the right to criticise decisions of one’s own institution — as contained in Strasbourg case law. Academics in our world-leading universities should enjoy the highest protections.
These should be firmly anchored in domestic law — we cannot count on being part of an international treaty forever. Academics must be able to comment on top-down decisions (e.g., on curriculum content) without fear of repercussion.
3⃣ Lord Sandhurst’s amendment which seeks to extend academic freedom protections to academic visiting speakers and puts universities under an absolute duty not to punish an academic for exercising their academic freedom.
This amendment would ensure that visiting fellowships could not be easily/arbitrarily rescinded (as, for example, happened to Jordan Peterson in 2019) and helps ensure that universities cannot sack academics merely for having unpopular but lawful views.
bbc.com/news/uk-englan…
bbc.com/news/uk-englan…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
