Labour MP Jess Phillips said changes are required to proposed legislation to ensure non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or confidentiality agreements do not inhibit the freedom of speech of those affected.
During a Parliamentary debate on Monday, Phillips singled out that students were being silenced by universities from speaking about the sexual abuse they have faced.
‘Beyond Belief’
When passed, the Bill will tighten existing legislation to make the promotion of free speech a statutory duty. This means that if universities fail to uphold free speech, they could be taken to court.“Snow has turned to ice: they are no longer snowflakes, they are in deep freeze, those people who dare not even read Austen, the Brontës, or George Eliot,” said Sir Hayes.
“Even arguing for free speech now has become something that is going to be condemned,” Dennis Hayes, president of Academics for Academics Freedom (AFAF) told The Epoch Times in regards to the hyper-political correctness situation that universities face in the UK.
‘You Have to Win the Argument for Free Speech’
Hayes said that he was pleased that Philips raised the issue, but it’s “only on one specific issue of sexual harassment is not a broader defence of free speech.”“Let’s have a removal of non disclosure agreements or confidentiality clauses for free speech. I have made that point many times is not original, but it’s ignored. And the university can get away with it while it’s confidential,” said Hayes.
“The battle at the moment is between whether freedom is a legislative issue or a cultural issue. Having laws is not going to make academics more confident about speaking up. You have to win the argument for free speech,” he said.
Hayes’ view was that universities are now in a “therapeutic culture.”
“It happens all the time that we have case after case after case where somebody says something that somebody finds offensive and they put in a complaint, and then universities because of their rules have to take it seriously,” he said.
“We’ve lost the distinction between behaviour and speech,” he said adding that an unfortunate phrase can be taken seriously and someone can be charged with misconduct if a student puts in a complaint about a member of staff, leading to disciplinary procedures.
“Then you can be in serious trouble if somebody takes subjective offence to what you say,” he said.
Not all disciplinary procedures in universities mention confidentiality. But breaches of confidentiality are normally treated as offences. An NDA comes at the end of a procedure.
Because of what will happen with the free speech legislation, what he called “lawfare” [a play on the word ‘warfare’] will see a move to universities being taken to court.
“And if that happens, it'll rather be about winning the legal cases, rather than winning the argument for free speech, ” said Hayes.
“but it’s important for people to be able to speak freely, that’s the main issue,” he said.
“We’ve moved from arguing for free speech and a lot of academics said ‘we’re not getting anywhere let’s just have a change in the law.’ And you can just see that happening so the secretive world will mean that there will be no change. Because everything is done behind closed doors, disciplinary procedures, and complaints” he added, saying that it will add to “ bureaucracy but not freedom of speech.”