Victoria University postpones ‘challenging’ free speech event
Five academics and public figures were set to debate free speech on university campuses on Monday but backlash within Victoria University has resulted in the event being postponed.
More than 600 people had registered their interest in attending the event, a panel discussion about the role of universities in free speech.
But earlier this week the university postponed the event with a notice saying “the mere framing of this event has surfaced a depth of feeling and a polarisation of views on how we should proceed, that has made it challenging to even schedule a conversation about how to have challenging conversations”.
The event was organised by vicechancellor Nic Smith, off the back of an opinion column he wrote in The Post where he argued that ACT’s proposal for universities to commit to a free speech policy could actually make speech on campus less free.
In a statement, Smith said the university remained committed to hosting the event, but wanted to have “a cross-section of balanced and representative views in the discussion and we need more time to do this”.
The postponement would ensure there was enough time to finalise “the most effective format and speakers for the event”.
The new format would also aim to value contributions from academics as community and interest groups.
Student association president Marcail Parkinson said that context had not been clear and people “freaked out” when they saw the panel lineup, which looked like a platform for “right-wing voices”, with the involvement of Free Speech Union president Jonathan Ayling and the New Zealand Initiative’s Dr Michael Johnston.
She was glad to see the event was postponed and being reformatted. “That’s 100% the right thing to do in this scenario, when you make a mistake, to say actually we realise we made a mistake and we’re going to try and fix it.”
Student protests had been planned for Monday’s event, Parkinson said, and it well as remained to be seen whether they would go ahead for the reformatted event.
“Hopefully, those conversations will mean that the event is inclusive and doesn’t make people feel unsafe in any way. But it's yet to be seen whether that will actually come through.
“I just think that the university hierarchy ought to have a little more backbone than that. But it is what it is,” said Johnston who had been lined up for the panel.
He did not think it was a good look to postpone the event, but was not overly worried as long as it went ahead. “As long as it proceeds so that everybody can have their say and nobody has been deplatformed because of pressure being applied.”
Ayling said he applauded the university holding the event and striking the right balance of panellists, but there needed to be strong leadership around allowing disruptive ideas and debate.
“The idea that we’re going to be able to have an event where everyone is sitting around politely agreeing and singing Kumbaya is not realistic, and that’s not the role of the university. It’s to allow for ideas to be thoroughly tested and for robust debate to occur.”
Three other panellists – Law Professor Nicola Moreham, from Victoria University, Emeritus Professor Jane Kelsey, from the University of Auckland, and Dr John Byron, from the Queensland University of Technology – did not respond to requests for comment.