Be Ready to be Shocked and Offended at University, Students Told as Free Speech Law Comes In
Students should be ready to be shocked and offended at university, Government free speech champion Arif Ahmed has said, as he warned universities they face fines if they fail to uphold free speech under a new law coming into force in August. BBC News has more.
Arif Ahmed, from the Office for Students (OfS), which regulates universities, told the BBC that exposure to views which students might find offensive was “part of the process of education”.
It comes as the OfS published guidance for universities in England on how a new law, designed to protect free speech, will work when it comes into force from August.
Universities had requested clarity from the OfS on how to best uphold freedom of speech, after the University of Sussex was fined £585,000 for failing to do so in March.
The university was issued with the fine earlier this year under existing powers, after the OfS said its policy on trans and non-binary equality had a “chilling effect” on freedom of speech.
Kathleen Stock had previously resigned from her post as philosophy professor at the university, following protests by students against her gender-critical views.
The university has begun a legal challenge against the fine, arguing that the investigation was flawed.
Universities UK, which represents 141 institutions, said at the time of the fine that it would write to the OfS to clarify what would represent a breach of freedom of speech rules.
It now says it is “pleased” the OfS has taken on feedback, and would “make sure universities are appropriately supported to comply” with the new rules.
From this summer, the new law will place a stronger responsibility on universities in England to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom.
The OfS can sanction universities, with the potential for fines to run into millions of pounds, if they are found to have failed to do so.
Almost every aspect of university life – from protests to debates, training and teaching – is covered by the new guidelines on how the law will be applied.
For returning students, or those starting university this year, there may be not be a noticeable immediate change, but Dr Ahmed says the law is about the freedom for anything to be discussed or taught.
Speaking directly to students, the Director for Free Speech said: “You should expect to face views you might find shocking or offensive, and you should be aware that’s part of the process of education.”
He added that students should be able to express any view, no matter how offensive it is to others, as long as it is not outside what is generally allowed by law, such as harassment or unlawful discrimination.
Worth reading in full.
Dr Ahmed told the Times that students should be tasked with writing essays defending viewpoints they find offensive when they start university. He said:
Universities will have a duty to promote freedom of speech from August 1st. They should be doing inductions. There could be time set aside for controversial discussions, inviting speakers on controversial issues or getting students to write essays defending views that they absolutely don’t agree with. Exposing them to a range of ideas, putting people together who disagree and getting them to engage in active listening — all of these are things universities would be well placed to try out as part of their duty to promote freedom of speech.
He added that while the OfS will be able to fine universities or deny them access to public funding, its approach would be “completely neutral” on contentious issues.
Everybody on both sides of these disputes has an equal right to freedom of speech and will be equally protected by us. You can’t ban ideas, you can’t ban viewpoints. Freedom of speech should be something that everyone should be excited about. It’s a central value of our whole culture, without it you don’t have a proper functioning society.
Elsewhere, the guidance tells universities they should cut ties with countries such as China that imperil free speech by using students to harass and spy on others.
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.
“Dr Ahmed told the Times that students should be tasked with writing essays defending viewpoints they find offensive when they start university.”
NO, NO, NO! This is a very clever Sleight of Hand to force students to DEFEND ISLAM against their will.
This is what happens when you put an Indian Muslim, whose parents came to the UK just before he was born, and now calls himself “An English Philosopher”, in charge of “Free Speech” in the UK. Raised as a Muslim, he claims to be an atheist, of course, as so many of them do, while quietly working to establish The Global Caliphate.
Take everything with a grain of salt, people.
Dr Ahmed assumes being offended is a normal state. It is (was) not and that is the problem. Students should be tasked with learning how to write learned and well supported essays, free of emotion and prejudice and with as much objectivity as is reasonable. In the early stages universities should want to see how widely a student is read, rather than having to endure their own personal belief systems.
Well said. A properly rounded education involves teaching students how to learn, how to exercise critical thought, and how to express themselves. It is healthy for students to encounter viewpoints that differ from their own, if expressed in an inoffensive manner, but forcing students to defend viewpoints to which they are opposed is a form of abuse.
Introduced into education as “role play” which is a form of conditioning and deceptively potent. Why is Dr Ahmed not emphasising the importance of academic rigour?
Excellent point about “role play”! Dr. Ahmed’s proposal reminds me of something a lawyer friend told me decades ago, when I was outraged by the lenient sentence given by a judge to a hit-and-run driver who crashed into a mother holding a baby while walking with others on a narrow country road at night. The baby was hurled through the driver’s windshield onto the front seat, but he kept driving at speed until he found a field gate, threw the baby out the window into the field, and sped away. The baby of course was dead, but the judge gave him only 3 months suspended sentence and a risible fine. My lawyer friend praised the driver’s lawyer for getting him off lightly, and explained to me that lawyers are taught to leave aside all question of justice and morality when defending a criminal, because their job is to get the criminal off, no matter what he has done. He said that the worse the crime, and the more obvious and proven the criminal’s guilt, the greater and more admirable the skill of the lawyer in winning the case. I was horrified, but it was a valuable lesson to me about… Read more »
Self deception requires a voice speaking to it. ‘I deceive myself’ reveals two entities in that dichotomy. I believe Satan is the father of lies. Some would say he must never be believed even when he is telling the truth, because that too might be a trick. Agree totally with your comment.
I also believe that Satan is the father of lies, ruining, corrupting and destroying everything good in the world.
And that’s why we should never let lawyers become Members of Parliament.
That’s also why the House of Lords was, and still is, so useful to the people, because it was traditionally composed of non-lawyers, whose attitude toward justice more closely matched that of the general public, and provided an essential balance to the excesses of the House of Commons.
Didn’t it use to be a part of the Foreign Office elite-track interview, that the interviewer would pull out your CV and say “I see you are interested in X” eg, Ban the Bomb, “Convince me that the Bomb is a good thing.” It was a test as to whether you could put yourself in the other chap’s shoes.
I’m sure Muslims would be told to make a strong case for Israel or the C of E. To see whether they could. Assuming this standard is still applied to interviewees, of course.
I’m sure Muslims would be given the Diversity Free Pass to avoid doing any such thing.
How on earth can you be suitable material for University if you don’t already know and understand that people have different opinions and you may find some of them offensive.
The kids have be pre-brainwashed before University entrance by over a decade of Left-wing propaganda in their school years. What was it the Jesuit Ignatious Loyola said? “Give me the child for the first seven years and I will give you the man”
They have had years of it being drilled into them WHAT you may think, not HOW to think, and this produces a deep level of indoctrination, which means they are in for a shock when they get out into the real world.
Well I’m investing in Teddy Bear manufacturing – as support toys for the little darlings.