Katharine Gelber and Kristine Bowman write in The Conversation (24.6.19) about the federal Education Minister’s push for Australian universities to adopt a ‘free speech code’, with the authors suggesting that the pressure for universities to take action on free speech may be more about politics than anything else.
‘The federal education minister, Dan Tehan, has called on universities to implement a model code to protect freedom of speech and academic freedom on campus. He’s referring to the code drafted by a former High Court chief justice, Robert French, in his review of freedom of speech in Australian universities.
‘Tehan said he commissioned the review due to concerns certain views were being shut down on campus. This followed protests at Sydney University during a talk by sex-therapist and commentator Bettina Arndt. The talk challenged notions of a rape culture on campus.
‘French’s report concluded there was no systemic free speech crisis in Australian universities. But he noted many universities’ policies use broad terms that create the potential to limit free speech on campus.
‘He therefore suggested universities voluntarily strengthen their protections for free speech by adopting general principles, which he set out in a model code. So, what does that code look like? And should universities be adopting it?’
- Dan Tehan wants a ‘model code’ on free speech at universities – what is it and do unis need it? »
- Uni chancellors working on national free speech code »
- Free speech on Australian campuses: Hidden barriers »
- Special pleading: free speech and Australian universities »
- Free speech isn’t under threat. It just suits bigots and boors to suggest so »
- Freedom of speech: a history from the forbidden fruit to Facebook »
- There are differences between free speech, hate speech and academic freedom – and they matter »
- How a fake ‘free speech crisis’ could imperil academic freedom »
- University free speech bill a sop to Pauline Hanson and other critics, but what difference will it make? »
- Feel free to disagree on campus – by learning to do it well »
- If not in a university, then where? Academia must define harm to allow open debate on difficult issues »
- Court gives legal weight to academics’ right to intellectual freedom, but it’s not the final word »
- High Court lends weight to academic freedom despite Peter Ridd losing appeal against dismissal »
- As the Ridd case reminds us, academic freedom is not the same as free speech »
- Universities must act to prevent espionage and foreign interference, but our national laws still threaten academic freedom »
- University changes to academic contracts are threatening freedom of speech »