(2 days, 18 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I remind noble Lords of my interests in the register and warmly welcome the proportionate way in which the Government are acting and my noble friend’s Statement. Free speech is the lifeblood of a university. This reconsideration of the Act certainly recognises that, but all universities also recognise that they have a duty to instil a culture in which free speech flourishes.
I have two swift questions. First, on the OfS power to consider complaints, how will it ensure that its actions are proportionate? Secondly, on the conditions of regulation, the Statement says:
“The OfS should have room to determine the best way to regulate on a case-by-case basis”.
Will Parliament be consulted in any way on how it regulates?
Finally, I say to the noble Baroness opposite that universities are already putting in place codes of conduct—for example, on freedom of speech—so they are acting already.
(2 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, the Faculty of Music at Oxford University does excellent research. Earlier on, the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, said:
“When the University of Oxford’s Faculty of Music decolonised its curriculum in response to student pressure, the university itself sought to forbid criticism of the new curriculum.”
I have checked with the head of humanities at Oxford University, Professor Dan Grimley. There were indeed some articles in the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail suggesting that that might have been the case, but I have it from the professor—from the horse’s mouth, as it were—that the music curriculum at Oxford has not been decolonised and there has been absolutely no attempt to stifle debate.
Briefly, on the horse’s mouth, I did not get my information from the Telegraph; I got it from music academics at Oxford University.