Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether he plans to take steps in response to the reported planned introduction by the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University of arrangements (a) defining racism as an exclusively white phenomenon, (b) encouraging the anonymous reporting of perceived microaggressions by named individuals and (c) other related measures; and what steps the Government plans to take through forthcoming legislative proposals to tackle such arrangements in UK universities.
Answered by Michelle Donelan
I understand that the Vice Chancellor of the University of Cambridge has issued a statement setting out that the website referred to has been temporarily taken down while some material is removed, and I welcome this decision.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether the proposed legislation on free speech in universities (a) recognises the disruptive effects of investigations of students and staff for expressing their personal opinions within the law, (b) provides for the immediate dismissal of vexatious complaints and (c) would have precluded any formal investigation by Abertay University of a student who gave her opinion of what defines a woman, having been asked in a class discussion to do so.
Answered by Michelle Donelan
The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill, introduced on 12 May 2021 in the House of Commons, will protect the fundamental principle of freedom of speech by strengthening existing freedom of speech protections and addressing gaps within the current framework.
This bill, particularly the new duty to promote freedom of speech and academic freedom in higher education (HE), will empower those who run our universities and colleges to publicly defend the right of all of their students, staff members and visiting speakers to speak freely within the law.
In many cases, this should mean that they do not feel a need to investigate where an individual is clearly expressing lawful, if perhaps offensive or controversial, views. Some examples will be less clear-cut, and some investigation will be needed to ascertain the facts. It will remain the responsibility of the provider (or students’ union) to balance their duties when considering the issues, having particular regard to the importance of freedom of speech.
The new Office for Students (OfS) complaints scheme will ensure that students, staff members and visiting speakers have a clear route for making complaints and seeking redress where they believe their freedom of speech or academic freedom has been unlawfully restricted on campus. The OfS will have the ability to dismiss complaints that it considers to be frivolous or vexatious.
The statutory tort will act as a backstop, offering a direct route to the courts for redress for individuals who have suffered loss due to a breach of the freedom of speech duties. In the case of a vexatious claim, the claimant would struggle to make their case if they could not clearly point to any tangible loss suffered as a result of a breach of the freedom of speech duties, and they would also risk having to pay substantial legal costs as a result, both their own and the provider’s or students’ union’s.
The subject matter of the majority of the bill is education, which is a devolved matter. Accordingly, the principal measures in the bill will only apply to England and will not apply to Scottish universities.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 3 March 2021 to Question 159265 on Outdoor Education: Coronavirus, how much notice he plans to give suppliers of such services of the date on which they can reopen as covid-19 lockdown restrictions are eased; and if he will make it his policy to permit the resumption of such outdoor activities as soon as is safely practicable.
Answered by Nick Gibb
Schools are advised against all educational visits at this time. The Department is working on advice for schools and colleges on the planning and booking of residential visits when it is safe to do so and in line with the Government’s roadmap to recovery, as set out here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-response-spring-2021/covid-19-response-spring-2021. The advice will be published shortly.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2020 to Question 5319 on freedom of speech at Sheffield University, what steps he plans to take to block reported proposals by Durham University Student Union to (a) vet in advance external speakers invited to address student societies, (b) require such speakers to submit their speeches to the Union in advance and (c) cancel the invitations to such speakers or require that additional speakers should also be invited; what the legal basis is for student unions to exercise such powers against speakers whom they judge to be controversial; what recent assessment he has made of whether universities are meeting their obligations to (i) protect freedom of speech and (ii) exercise any necessary restrictions on speaker invitations by student societies which pose an identifiable threat to students on campus; and what assessment he has made of whether those obligations require review.
Answered by Michelle Donelan
This government has been clear in its commitment to strengthen academic freedom and ensure that our universities are places where free speech can thrive. That is why tougher legal measures have been announced by my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Education, on 16 February, to stamp out unlawful ‘silencing’ on campuses.
The Education Act 1986 imposes a legal duty on those involved in the government of universities to secure lawful free speech. If it has been accurately reported in the press, the decision by Durham University is gravely disappointing and not in line with our high expectations for universities in this area. To give a student union this power over external speakers is wholly inappropriate: no university should ever grant a student union any authority or role in vetting, limiting or otherwise overseeing which external speakers may be invited to speak on campus, or under what circumstances they may do so.
Although it is true that when considering external speakers, higher education providers should, under the Prevent duty, consider the risks that the event may pose in drawing students into terrorism, this must be balanced against their duty to secure freedom of speech; it is only rarely that speakers will form into this category, and applying intrusive procedures on a blanket basis, such as asking all speakers to submit their speeches in advance, is unnecessary and inappropriate. In the vast majority of cases these risks can be mitigated without shutting down speech. In any case, to outsource such decisions to a Student Union, giving them de facto control of who can speak on campus, is completely unacceptable.
At my request, officials have asked the Office for Students, the independent regulator, to investigate this matter and have also contacted the Vice Chancellor of the university to express my concerns.
The new measures set out in the February 2021 policy paper are a part of this government’s commitment to strengthen free speech and academic freedom at universities in England.
The policy paper can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/higher-education-free-speech-and-academic-freedom.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what recent progress he has made in developing a scheme for the financing of the fees of British Muslim students in a way which is compatible with the provisions of the Islamic faith.
Answered by Michelle Donelan
I refer my right hon. Friend, the Member for New Forest East, to the answer I gave on 14 January 2021 to Question 135997.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the hon. Member for City of Chester, representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, whether the Commission (a) plans to enable itself to take prosecutions to court without prior police investigation, and (b) currently is entitled to empower itself to do so.
Answered by Christian Matheson
Later this year the Electoral Commission will be consulting with political parties, with police and prosecution authorities, and with the public on changes to its Enforcement Policy. This will include proposals setting out how we will decide to bring prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. This does not require a change in legislation and will bring the Commission’s regulatory work in line with a wide range of other regulators.
When the capability is in place, the Commission will be able to investigate and bring lower order offences before the courts in a way which is swift and proportionate, and complies with the necessary investigation standards. It will act as an important deterrent to those tempted to break electoral law, deliver more effective regulation of political finance and support public confidence. It will also free up the resources of the police and prosecutors, although they will remain in the lead on complex and more serious criminal investigations.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what plans he has in place to ensure that the GCSE and A-level grades awarded to pupils at improving schools in disadvantaged areas including New Forest Academy which are projected to achieve significantly better results in 2020 than in 2019 are an adequate reflection of those projections; and if he will put in place means of appeal other than on administrative grounds for students awarded grades that their school considers to be inappropriate or unfair.
Answered by Nick Gibb
These are matters for the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) and I have asked its Chief Regulator, Sally Collier, to write directly to the Honourable Member. A copy of her reply will be placed in the House of Commons Library.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what contingency arrangements are in place for the care of (a) SEN children and (b) dependent children in the event that their parents are unable to care for them as a result of covid-19.
Answered by Vicky Ford
The welfare of all children and young people, including those with special educational needs or disabilities, and their parents or carers is a high priority for the government, especially during this period of uncertainty. We are working closely with colleagues across government to ensure that appropriate arrangements and support are in place for all department sectors – from the early years and childcare, to schools and children’s social care, and for vulnerable groups including children with special educational needs.
We have given local authorities £1.6 billion of additional funding to help address the pressures arising from COVID-19. That includes funding to meet the costs of securing additional placements should that be needed. We are also considering what more can be done to increase the supply of foster care placements.
We have published guidance on ongoing support for vulnerable children and children’s social care:
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether he plans to take steps in response to proposals by Sheffield university to pay some students to monitor and report on statements made by other students which might be regarded as micro-aggressions; what progress he has made on bringing forward proposals to safeguard free speech in colleges and universities; and if he will draw the lessons of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four to the attention of college and university staff during this 70th anniversary year of the author’s death.
Answered by Chris Skidmore
This government will ensure that our universities are places where free speech can thrive and work to strengthen academic freedoms. The freedom to express views openly, challenge ideas and engage in robust debate is crucial to the student experience and to democracy. Lawful freedom of speech and the right to discuss all kinds of issues is an integral part of our higher education system.
Under the Education (No 2) Act (1986), higher education providers have a specific duty to take reasonably practicable steps to secure freedom of speech within the law for staff, students and visiting speakers. Higher education providers also have clear responsibilities under the Equality Act (2010).
Higher education providers should discharge their responsibilities fully and have robust policies and procedures in place to comply with the law and to investigate and address incidents reported to them. Universities, as autonomous bodies regulated by the Office for Students, should ensure that they are balancing their legal duties carefully and proportionately.
The government worked with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who published clear guidance in February 2019 on freedom of speech in higher education to support higher education providers and students’ unions in delivering their duties.
The government will be looking closely at how well higher education providers are meeting their obligations and will consider whether further action is needed, working with a range of partners.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the Daily Telegraph article entitled University cancels talk on extremist speakers, published on 26 March 2019, if he will commission an inquiry into (a) the circumstances in which the free speech society at Bristol University was prevented from hosting a meeting featuring the author of Extreme Speakers league table; (b) the nine occasions listed in that league table when allegedly extreme speakers were hosted at Bristol University; (c) the criteria applied by the University in deciding to ban meetings on security grounds; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Chris Skidmore
Free speech plays a vital and important role in our society, and universities should be places where students are exposed to a range of issues, including those which may be controversial, and are encouraged to debate and challenge them.
It is right that extremist views should be exposed and challenged. That is why, under the Prevent duty, (to have due regard to prevent people being drawn into terrorism), Higher Education (HE) providers must have policies in place around the management of speakers. This means ensuring the right steps are taken to contest extremist narratives and to make sure that those wishing spread hatred do not go unchallenged.
However, challenging extremism does not mean banning lawful speech, and the Prevent duty also explicitly requires further and higher education institutions have regard to their duty to secure freedom of speech. It is up to individual institutions to determine who they deem appropriate to invite to speak on their campuses on a case-by-case basis; government does not dictate who should and should not be invited to speak in higher education providers, providing their speech is within the law.
We do not routinely comment on individual cases. However, monitoring of the Prevent duty by the Office for Students shows us that HE providers are navigating the balance between freedom of speech and challenging extremism pragmatically and effectively. We recognise that these are complex issues, which is why the government supports the sector on Prevent implementation through our network of Further and HE Regional Prevent Co-ordinators on the ground. We have also worked alongside the Equalities and Human Rights Commission and wider stakeholders to produce the recently published Freedom of Expression guidance. This will enable universities and student unions to understand their obligations for protecting and supporting free speech, and sets out where speech may be unlawful, alongside relevant case studies to support providers in balancing their duties.