Key Facts

• The amendments ensure colleges within universities are subject to new strengthened freedom of speech and academic freedom duties.
• These amendments aim to restore a legislative position similar to the one in place before August 2019.
• Affected institutions include Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, among others.
• The amendment aims to close a gap identified in the original legislation.
• Colleges fund their JCRs and MCRs but do not own or occupy premises run by these groups.
• Imposing freedom of speech duties on such groups is seen as unnecessary and overly bureaucratic.
• The amendment seeks to extend the duty of higher education providers to promote academic freedom in research.
• Proposed new section A3 of the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 creates a general duty to promote free speech within the law and academic freedom on campuses.
• The Minister commits to considering further clarity for PhD researchers who hold dual roles as students and teachers.
• Amendment 83 aims to insert 'sole' after 'the' in clause 2, page 4, line 3.
• The Free Churches Group of England and Wales provided written evidence raising concerns about premises use under the Bill.
• Emma Hardy's amendments are linked to maintaining respect for different views and contexts when using university spaces.
• The Free Churches Group's written evidence expresses concern about the drafting of Points (3) and (4) in section A1 of the Bill.
• The Education (No.2) Act 1986 is referenced as a similar clause but in a different context.
• There are concerns that the current wording could lead to disputes within religious groups and potential court claims.
• The amendment would apply provisions that currently only apply to students' unions to other student bodies.
• 'Other student body' is defined as Junior Common Rooms, Middle Common Rooms, and clubs or societies made up of students at a higher education institution.
• The amendment aims to broaden the scope of freedom of speech protections to cover additional types of student organizations.
• The new clause aims to extend free speech duties to junior and middle common rooms (JCRs and MCRs) as well as other relevant bodies.
• Smita Jamdar, a practising lawyer at Shakespeare Martineau, stated that the legislation only applies to universities and student unions as defined.
• Concern exists about smaller institutions like Hull College being subject to all aspects of the Bill while JCRs and MCRs are not covered.
• The Bill may lead to a disaffiliation of some student organizations from university campuses.
• Liverpool Hope University has only three full-time members of staff at its student union, highlighting resource disparities among universities.
• St Mary’s College at Durham University runs its own booking system for the JCR.
• David Simmonds notes that JCRs are not autonomous but supervised by their respective colleges and universities.
• Student unions are regulated by the Charity Commission.
• Most student unions rely on university funding rather than commercial income.
• Junior common rooms (JCRs) have some regulatory oversight from their institution but may not be registered with the Charities Commission.
• Private providers often run purpose-built student accommodation, creating questions about regulation of common spaces.
• Lloyd Russell-Moyle suggests amending the duty to cover commercial providers.
• Concerns are raised about visiting students and academics who may not be protected by their home institution.
• The closure of the University of London union is cited as an example of potential issues with existing legal frameworks.
• The proposed new clause aims to regulate detailed workings of student societies.
• Some universities have ancient debating unions like Oxford, Cambridge, and Durham that may have different privileges compared to newer institutions.
• There are concerns about Chinese student societies receiving large amounts of funding from the Chinese Communist Party on UK campuses.
• Student unions must have regard to freedom of speech when making decisions.
• Proposed new section A5 requires student unions to maintain a code of practice for meetings, activities, and funding criteria.
• Non-affiliated student societies are subject to the provider’s code of practice if they use university premises.
• The Bill aims to regulate freedom of speech on university campuses.
• Concerns are raised about regulating private properties used by universities.
• Some argue for clear distinctions between formally affiliated student groups and independent gatherings.