Debates over campus free speech and academic freedom erupted in August 2018 when Don Brash was initially stopped from speaking at Massey University and then in 2021 when seven professors at the University of Auckland signed a letter about Mātauranga Māori in the science curriculum of the NCEA.
And it's all flared up at Wellington's Te Herenga-Waka Victoria University in recent weeks.
Dr. Michael Johnston, a senior fellow at free market think tank the New Zealand Initiative, is part of a panel on freedom of expression on the Victoria University campus, which was originally postponed due to a backlash over the lack of diversity and the perceived right-wing views. tendencies of the panel – including him.
The university said it had created a new format and added a diversity of panelists to the event after listening to feedback from staff and student groups.
It will be divided into two groups, with a range of advocates and academics, held in a lecture hall and moderated by RNZ's Corin Dann.
Johnston, a former academic and associate professor of education at the university, said it is an example of how campuses are becoming increasingly polarized.
“The best way out is to share and contest ideas freely and openly. The university should be a platform for that, and we should not want to restrict that in any way.”
He said the university's response to the Mātauranga Māori letter in the Listener in 2021, and an investigation the University of Canterbury conducted into a paper by Chinese academic Anne-Marie Brady, were two examples from the recent past.
Concerns about freedom of expression were not limited to Victoria University.
The University of Canterbury is currently reviewing its academic freedom policy. According to Professor Ursula Cheer, this is the subject of a heated debate.
“It certainly happens that universities draw up policies regarding academic freedom and try to guide this. What, in my opinion, is not in accordance with the law and is worrying – is of great importance.
“I certainly think there is an atmosphere in universities where academics are becoming increasingly afraid to speak about certain issues.”
She said the Education and Training Act enshrines in it the academic freedom of tertiary institutions, particularly that academic staff and students can question and test received wisdom, put forward new ideas, or express uncontroversial or unpopular opinions within the law express.
Professor Nic Smith, Vice-Chancellor of Victoria University, advised staff and students on a set of principles about discussions in public debate and hosting alternative views on campus.
These principles included that conversations should be respectful, mana-conservative, and fact-based, and that the content of conversations should be aligned with the university's values.
Johnston said the principle that seeks to limit debate on campus to the university's values could stifle speech.
But Smith said that was not the intention, and he sought to protect staff who speak out from those who attack them, including internet trolls.
“My hope is that we can embrace and engage in uncomfortable and challenging conversations.”
He said most organizations are in favor of conversations taking place in line with their values, including respect, responsibility, honesty, integrity and empathy.
But he also emphasized that conversations must be based on facts, and that not “everyone” at the university is allowed to speak.
“If we want the flat-earthers, they can go to what we used to call Twitter.”
ACT leader David Seymour said the Education and Training Act was not working effectively enough when a debate on freedom of expression was postponed due to the presence of right-wing voices.
He said the Education and Training Act will be amended within the next two years to require universities to adopt freedom of expression policies if they want to receive government funding.
He expected universities to adopt a similar model to the University of Chicago.
“It should be very clear that people are able to express their views, which others may not like, but claims of emotional harm and emotional safety are not sufficient reasons to stop someone from speaking.”
Smith said he did not want the government's policy to have a chilling effect on academics or students with nuanced views or who change their minds.
“In universities, it's really important that we can support our academics, that we can support experts, that we can support the middle ground that can add context, nuance and evidence to these discussions to be participants.
“And we don't just end up with the polarized extremes shouting at each other from what they all claim is a high moral ground.”
But Johnston said controversial — even dangerous ideas — must be confronted.
“You raise your hand during question time and you get stuck. We need a more robust culture for the exchange and discussion of ideas. I think that's the new thing – that that now seems to be a controversial idea in itself.”
The issues will be discussed at the Victoria University event, titled 'The role of universities in supporting freedom of expression', on May 28.