Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what action they are taking in response to the warning by MI5's director general that hostile states are shaping research and teaching content, including the use of professional networking sites and financial incentives to form relationships with academic staff and students; and whether they plan to introduce a public register of corporate and personal financial interests of universities and staff.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The government is investing £3 million to bolster existing support for higher education providers and access to expert advice on national security risk management, alongside a new Academic Interference Reporting Route and new guidance.
The Office for Students has already been clear universities should resist any external state threats to academic freedom, and they have extensive powers to require information from providers and investigate any breach.
We keep all our protections under review, working closely with universities to assess existing approaches to managing foreign interference, to ensure that any new requirements are proportionate and add value to existing protections.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the comment of the universities Minister, Baroness Smith of Malvern, that UK education has become "a prime target for foreign states", whether they will publish the details of the threats posed by foreign states to UK universities, and how individual universities have responded to those threats.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
It is the long-standing policy of successive UK governments not to comment either on individual cases or operational intelligence.
The world-class reputation of our universities makes them a prime target for foreign states and hostile actors, who seek to erode that reputation by promoting, shaping or censoring what universities can offer.
We are working together across government and with universities themselves to defend the UK’s thriving academic environment. By working together and sharing information, we will foster the confidence needed to stand strong in the face of foreign pressure.
To tackle this enduring threat, MI5 and cyber security services delivered a rare briefing to over 70 Vice Chancellors. The government is also investing £3 million to bolster existing support and access to expert advice on national security risk management, including a new Academic Interference Reporting Route and new guidance.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government when they received a warning from MI5 of a threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party to British universities; and what action they have taken in response to that warning.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
It is the long-standing policy of successive UK governments not to comment either on individual cases or operational intelligence.
The world-class reputation of our universities makes them a prime target for foreign states and hostile actors, who seek to erode that reputation by promoting, shaping or censoring what universities can offer.
We are working together across government and with universities themselves to defend the UK’s thriving academic environment. By working together and sharing information, we will foster the confidence needed to stand strong in the face of foreign pressure.
To tackle this enduring threat, MI5 and cyber security services delivered a rare briefing to over 70 Vice Chancellors. The government is also investing £3 million to bolster existing support and access to expert advice on national security risk management, including a new Academic Interference Reporting Route and new guidance.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government, in regard to the King's College London report The China question: managing risks and maximising benefits from partnership in higher education and research, published in March 2021, what action they have taken to reduce risks to intellectual property, academic freedom and financial stability; and what plans they have to improve management of those risks.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
We must distinguish between allegations of foreign interference and the positive impact that partnership and students from China bring to our higher education (HE) sector, economy and society as a whole.
HE providers are autonomous bodies, independent of government, and we expect the sector to be alert to security risks when collaborating with international partners, ensuring their compliance with relevant legislation and regulations.
Providers must also continue to make the appropriate financial decisions to ensure their long term sustainability, with the Office for Students (OfS) monitoring the risk of over reliance on overseas income at a sector level.
The department commenced strengthened duties on providers and on the OfS in relation to free speech and academic freedom. These duties have been in effect since 1 August 2025, and the Office for Students has also issued extensive guidance to HE providers on what they should do to ensure they effectively protect and promote free speech and academic freedom as per these duties.
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology provides robust support to the UK's research sector on managing the risks of collaboration, including tailored advice from the Research Collaboration Advice Team, and the National Protective Security Authority and National Cyber Security Centre’s ‘Trusted Research’ guidance.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the King's College London report The China question: managing risks and maximising benefits from partnership in higher education and research, published in March 2021; and what action they have taken to reduce the risk of dependency on China for research, funding and student numbers.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
We must distinguish between allegations of foreign interference and the positive impact that partnership and students from China bring to our higher education (HE) sector, economy and society as a whole.
HE providers are autonomous bodies, independent of government, and we expect the sector to be alert to security risks when collaborating with international partners, ensuring their compliance with relevant legislation and regulations.
Providers must also continue to make the appropriate financial decisions to ensure their long term sustainability, with the Office for Students (OfS) monitoring the risk of over reliance on overseas income at a sector level.
The department commenced strengthened duties on providers and on the OfS in relation to free speech and academic freedom. These duties have been in effect since 1 August 2025, and the Office for Students has also issued extensive guidance to HE providers on what they should do to ensure they effectively protect and promote free speech and academic freedom as per these duties.
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology provides robust support to the UK's research sector on managing the risks of collaboration, including tailored advice from the Research Collaboration Advice Team, and the National Protective Security Authority and National Cyber Security Centre’s ‘Trusted Research’ guidance.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what action they have taken to protect academic freedom and free speech on university campuses.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
This government is absolutely committed to freedom of speech and academic freedom. The department commenced the following provisions, which came into force from 1 August 2025:
The OfS has also issued extensive guidance to HE providers on commencement of their duties.
We are seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend and repeal elements of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 at the earliest opportunity.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what redress is available to any academic whose university has failed in its free speech duties in the absence of the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.
This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.
There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.
The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.
No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government, following their statement on 1 August that the overseas transparency provisions of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 “will remain under review while the government assesses the impact of the recently-introduced Foreign Influence Registration Scheme” (FIRS), what assessment they have made of whether FIRS provides sufficient safeguards against undue overseas influence on academic freedom.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The government is clear that foreign interference is unacceptable, and providers are already required to ensure that decisions are taken without direction, coercion or covert influence. Universities are already required by the Office for Students (OfS) to resist any external state threats to academic freedom, and the regulator already has the power to access funding records and take robust action, where it is relevant.
Earlier this year the government strengthened responsibilities for universities on free speech and academic freedom. OfS guidance supporting these requirements published in June made it explicitly clear that universities must resist external state threats to academic freedom, and that suppression of research because of the disapproval of a foreign government is unacceptable in practically any circumstances.
The department is supporting higher education providers to improve international due diligence and raise sector awareness of both foreign interference risks and relevant best practice. This work is underway, alongside evaluation of the implementation of the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, a new scheme which fully came into effect on the 1 October 2025.
We will keep the overseas funding provisions under review and will act in the event that evidence indicates further transparency reporting is necessary.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to bring into force the overseas transparency provisions of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, and what plans they have to review whether the uncommenced provisions are still necessary.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The department currently assesses that the overseas funding provisions may duplicate existing information gathering powers and create burden, without the benefit of setting clearer expectations for higher education (HE) providers around appropriate risk mitigation for international partnerships. Providers are already required by the Office for Students to resist any external state threats to academic freedom, and the regulator already has the power to access funding records and take robust action, where it is relevant.
We are seeking to enhance approaches to tackling foreign interference in the sector by engaging with the regulator on setting clearer expectations with providers on due diligence of arrangements, promoting a code of practice for international risk management and cultivating greater expertise on foreign interference in HE.
These are important issues, and it is crucial we support HE providers to maximise international opportunities whilst appropriately mitigating risk. We will keep the overseas funding provisions under review and will act in the event that evidence indicates further transparency reporting is necessary.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 not being in force on academics seeking redress when universities fail to meet their statutory free speech duties, in particular in the case of Professor Laura Murphy at Sheffield Hallam University.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.
This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.
There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.
The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.
No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.