Key Facts

• Professor Paul Layzell is principal of Royal Holloway, University of London and chair of Universities UK advisory group on free speech.
• Professor Jonathan Grant is professor of public policy at King’s College London.
• The Committee aims to discuss until 6 o'clock about the Bill's impact on universities.
• A survey of 2,000 students found that a quarter felt unable to express views due to nervousness about disagreeing with peers.
• Focus groups indicated concerns over biased reading lists and lecturers expressing political views in class.
• Professor Grant distinguishes between the 'cancel culture' aspect of the Bill as redundant and the issue of self-censorship in classrooms as more significant.
• Professor Grant discussed a joint committee model at King’s College London.
• Facebook research indicates that 71% of users self-censor online to meet social expectations.
• The Education Act 1994 only holds institutions responsible, while the new Bill proposes shared responsibility between institutions and student unions.
• The National Union of Students represents students facing various issues on campus including mental health, funding shortfalls, and sexual violence.
• It is estimated that implementing the Bill will cost student unions approximately £800,000 per year to sign off and distribute codes of practice.
• Student unions are often funded through negotiations with parent institutions but have faced financial losses due to pandemic-related disruptions.
• The Community Security Trust reported 58 university antisemitic incidents in 2018-19, 65 in 2019-20, and 109 in 2020-21.
• From 2018 to 2020, 15 speakers with associations to antisemitism came on to campus.
• The Bill aims to correct the lack of consistency in duties for higher education providers, including student unions.
• Danny Stone suggests adding a condition of registration in respect of discrimination to the OfS.
• David Miller's case at the University of Bristol is used as an example to illustrate the complexities surrounding academic freedom and antisemitism.
• Hillary Gyebi-Ababio emphasizes the need for stronger reassurances that the Bill will not allow free rein on discrimination.
• The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill aims to allow pervasive freedom of speech within legal constraints.
• The NUS supports a no-platforming policy for six organizations deemed racist and fascist.
• Danny Stone advocates for addressing complexities related to societal standards on hate speech and free speech in the Bill.
• Danny Stone does not have specific data on faith-based views being expressed in university environments.
• Hillary Gyebi-Ababio emphasizes the importance of balance in allowing challenging and controversial opinions while also protecting opposition.
• The Union of Jewish Students raised concerns about disruptions to Israeli speakers hosting events.
• The Bill could create a direct unintended consequence where student unions become more risk-averse in inviting speakers.
• Hillary Gyebi-Ababio mentions that there are existing frameworks and regulations to facilitate freedom of speech on campuses.
• According to the Office for Students (OfS) data, under 0.002% of events were cancelled due to concerns about free speech.
• Judith Cummins ends the time allocated for questions from the Committee.
• Witnesses thanked on behalf of the Committee for their evidence.