Equality law proposal to protect free speech
Human Rights Act update should tackle universities blocking certain speakers, think tank paper suggests
Equality laws could be amended to protect speakers from being noplatformed, under proposals drawn up by Policy Exchange, a Conservative think tank. Ministers are looking at changes to require public bodies to promote “diversity of political opinion” and protect people with views “incompatible” with the majority. Universities and student unions have used equality laws to ban speakers by citing the need to protect others from being offended or alienated.
EQUALITY laws could be amended to protect speakers from no-platforming under proposals drawn up by an influential Conservative think tank. Ministers are considering changes to require public bodies such as universities to promote “diversity of political opinion” and protect people with views “incompatible” with the majority.
Universities and student unions have been using equality legislation to ban controversial speakers by citing the need to protect others from being offended or alienated.
An analysis of equality laws by Policy Exchange says such bans stemmed from the public sector equality duty, which placed an onus on institutions to eliminate discrimination and advance equality. Cases included Christian unions banned from freshers fairs or applicants denied jobs because they held “gender critical” views where they did not accept that people could change sex.
“When the public sector equality duty is understood and applied in this manner, it has the potential to promote ideological conformity rather than true diversity in settings such as recruitment and education,” said Oxford law professor Paul Yowell, author of the analysis.
“The view that equality requires the exclusion of viewpoints that may cause discomfort is corrosive of the mission of universities to educate students to consider and debate, and test by argument, a wide range of ideas and theories.”
The Policy Exchange paper proposed amending the duty to make it clear that equality “requires tolerance of differing political opinions and religious and philosophical world views, and that a mark of a healthy institution is diversity of such opinions and world views”.
It added: “Especially in educational institutions and professions, such diversity should be valued. Uniformity of opinion, and an atmosphere that stifles, marginalises or discourages dissenting views, should be avoided.
“Such an amendment to the public sector equality duty would help to promote the right to private life, freedom of thought and belief, and expression under the Human Rights Act.”
A Government source said: “The paper’s analysis and recommendations will inform further policy development in this important area.”
Lord Faulks, the former justice minister, said: “At the heart of the paper lies the need to protect free speech, academic freedom, and true diversity of opinions, however unfashionable and upsetting some may regard the expression of such opinions to be. It has identified a number of ways in which the legislation should be amended so that Act’s true intentions can be protected rather than subverted by those who, while espousing the case for diversity, advance a rather narrow view of the opinions which merit protection under the Act.”