Accessibility Tools
Sign in
Click to Search Click to Search

Freedom of speech

The government is currently trying to pass a Freedom of Speech Bill that affects universities and students’ unions.

But evidence suggests there is no freedom of speech crisis in Higher Education, making the Bill a big waste of time. More importantly, the unnecessary Bill looks set to cause chaos and confusion for students.

We have a lot of questions.

Should student societies have to pay the extra costs the Bill calls for? What does the Bill mean for Durham’s common rooms? How will the new Director for Free Speech and Academic Freedom be held accountable? What happens when free speech crosses into hate speech? Why, after a year of hardship throughout the pandemic, is this the student issue that the government has decided to focus on?

The Bill shouldn’t pass, but if it does, it needs amending. We need your help to achieve that.

 

What are we doing?

Durham SU, along with other student organisations and universities, have submitted evidence to help MPs understand what the Bill means for students, and encourage them to amend or oppose the Bill. Click on the next tab to learn more about our submission.

Jack Ballingham, your Opportunities Officer, has also been writing to and meeting with MPs to discuss the Bill. Rt Hon Kevan Jones MP, Member of Parliament for North Durham, responded with the following:

“If this Bill becomes law, I fear that institutions and student unions will naturally become risk-averse and avoid inviting speakers for fear of financial repercussions if they are subsequently cancelled. In addition, many higher education institutions and colleges may not be able to cope administratively or financially with the additional burdens placed on them. The result will be fewer speakers, fewer debates and an overall reduction in free speech.” – Thursday 4 November, 2021

The Bill has been making a long journey through Parliament, and Jack has been opposing it along the way, through speaking to MPs, Lords and the media. View the timeline here to find out more.

Our evidence

View our full submission by clicking the button, or read our short summary below.

Durham SU evidence submission

What our evidence says...

The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill is a piece of legislation brought forward by the government, which aims to “strengthen academic freedom and free speech in universities”. As well as universities, the Bill lays out new requirements for students’ unions, including:  

  • Creating a new duty for SUs to “secure freedom of speech within the law” for members, staff and visiting speakers  
  • Requiring SUs do not deny the use of premises, or give use of premises, on terms influenced by a person’s ideas, beliefs or views, for holding meetings and events  
  • Requiring SUs maintain a code of practice, setting out their values relating to free speech, and the procedures to be followed by members, staff and visiting speakers when holding meetings 

As Bills are debated at the House of Commons and House of Lords, they also get scrutinised by the Public Bill Committee who explore evidence submitted by different interested parties. As the proposals in the Bill adversely affect students’ unions, it was important for us to make a submission. You can see our full submission here  which covers what we want to say in a lot more detail, or you can read the highlights below: 

  • We think there’s a lively culture of free speech at Durham.
  • The processes the Bill sets to impose on SUs and universities are hugely disproportionate to the scale of the issue.
  • There’s a lot of work the government still need to do on clarifying some of the complex interactions and powers between organisations including the Charity Commission and the Office for Students.
  • If the government wants SUs to be able to do the things they want us to do in this Bill, they’re going to need to support us financially and operationally.

What the evidence tells us locally and nationally…  

  • Recent analysis by WonkHE uncovered that at least 99.7% of student run events that exist to share ideas and think freely (debates, discussions, political activity, events with external speakers) go ahead without any intervention from the SU or the university operating under current Freedom of Speech guidance. 
  • Almost half of all Durham students are registered to at least one SU student group, we think this demonstrates that students at Durham take seriously their commitment to a lively and thriving student culture on campus. 

Our questions on the Bill

In our submission you can read a lot of technical questions we have on specific parts of the Bill.  

Some of the general points we raise include:

  • What is the relationship the government thinks should exist between the ‘right to free speech’ and ‘protesting against a speaker as a legitimate form of free speech’? 
  • Who should pay for additional costs the Bill calls for? Should it be a student society?
  • How can we be sure the government will appoint a Director of free Speech in an open, accountable and transparent way?
  • How does this Bill impact colleges, common rooms and other student organisations?
  • How does the Bill interact with existing laws such as the Equality Act? 
 

Ideally, we don’t want the Bill to pass, but if it does, we want to include these specific things: 

Firstly, we support two recommendations from the National Union of Students: 

  • Include an advisory group to the new Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom, made up of representatives from unions and other stakeholders, to provide accountability and to give an accurate picture of what is actually happening on our campuses. 
  • A sunset clause, so that this legislation will need to come back to the House and be reviewed to ensure it is achieving what it has set out to. 

Our own recommendations are: 

  • A clause to say that if an event is cancelled due to events beyond our control (e.g. a pandemic), then no one has to pay a financial penalty.
  • A recognition that some events are cancelled because the speaker hasn’t gone through the appropriate processes in order for an event to take place safely. 
  • Organisations should be able to freely choose individuals who speak at their events based on enhancement of quality of debate, choosing individuals relevant to their membership’s interests, or simple logistics.
  • We want students and staff represented on the appointment panel for the Director of Freedom of Speech
  • A fund is created for organisations who cannot afford to pay the security costs for potentially contentious speakers.