Breaking: new duty to protect free speech put on the back burner
The government has halted the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 six days before it was due to come into force.
30.07.2024
Bridget Phillipson, the Secretary of State for Education, has said that she is considering options about what to do with the legislation, one of which is to repeal the Act in its entirety because of concerns that it would be burdensome to implement for providers and the Office for Students.
Colleges are under an existing duty to take reasonable steps to ensure freedom of speech within the law for staff, members, students and visiting speakers in accordance with the Education (No 2) Act 1986. But the additional duties set out in this Act which would have required colleges to have “particular regard” to the importance of free speech, and to allow academics to question and test received wisdom, put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions, will not now come into force on 1 August 2024.
The Secretary of State has said that she will confirm her long-term plans “as soon as possible”. We'll keep you updated.
Our newsletters
We publish monthly employment and education newsletters. If you'd like to be added to the mailing list, please let me know.
Key Contacts
Related Articles
Expert CommentUnderstanding the Equality Act 2010: EHRC updates its guidance for schools and collegesNew guidance for schools
Expert CommentThe SEND White Paper: our viewThe Government’s SEND White Paper aims to create a more inclusive and streamlined system. While we welcome that ambition, the proposals raise important practical concerns about how the system will work in practice.
Expert CommentGender neutral toilets in primary school breached regulations and indirectly discriminated against girlsIn DE and FG v West Lothian Council the parents of a five-year old girl brought judicial proceedings against a Scottish local authority because the toilet facilities in one of its newly built schools were gender-neutral. They argued the council had breached relevant regulations and its toilet policy indirectly discriminated against girls. They also alleged that the effect of the policy harassed their daughter.
