Charles Sturt University Vice-Chancellor and president Andrew Vann has questioned the Federal government decision to set up an inquiry into freedom of speech at Australian universities.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Professor Vann said universities already had sufficient and good frameworks to protect and promote free speech on its campuses.
“I don’t think the inquiry is necessary,” Mr Vann said.
Last week, Federal Education minister Dan Tehan commissioned an inquiry into rules and regulations protecting freedom of speech on campuses.
Mr Tehan asked the former Chief Justice of the High Court Robert French to review existing material regarding free speech, including the codes of conduct, enterprise agreements, policy statements and strategic plans.
“The best university education is one where students are taught to think for themselves, and protecting freedom of speech is how to guarantee that,” Mr Tehan said
"If necessary, the French Review could lead to the development of an Australian version of the Chicago Statement, which is a voluntary framework that clearly sets out a university’s commitment to promoting freedom of speech."
Read also:
The Chicago Statement says that universities should not shield individuals from ideas that are ‘unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive’ and that it is wrong to ‘obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views’, according to free market think-tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA).
Matthew Lesh, a research fellow with the IPA, said Australia’s universities were failing to live up to their moral and legal duty to safeguard free expression.
“The latest audit also found that just eight of Australia’s 42 universities have a standalone policy on freedom of expression, as mandated by the Higher Education Support Act 2003,” Mr Lesh said.
Read also:
Professor Vann, however, has a different view.
“The Institute of Public Affairs has been pushing the view that there is a problem with free speech, but I don’t think it actually stacks up against the reality,” Professor Vann said.
“The Institute of Public Affairs has produced the so-called Freedom of Speech on Campus Audit, but we disagree with their methodology.
“I think they are pushing it to make some different points but it does not seem to me to match the reality of what I have observed in Australian universities,” he said.
Professor Vann said as a university, the very thing they want to do is to encourage people to engage critically with ideas.
“We will engage with the government’s inquiry in good spirits and give the same answer that from our perspective there is no problem.”