CAROLYN EVANS and ADRIENNE STONE with JADE ROBERTS Open Minds: Academic freedom and freedom of speech in Australia. Reviewed by Braham Dabscheck
Is freedom of speech under threat in Australia’s universities? In Open Minds authors Evans and Stone examine the evidence.
In 2018 two incidents occurred that prompted the federal government to initiate an investigation into the internal operations of Australia’s universities. The first was James Cook University’s dismissal of geophysicist Peter Ridd for not acting ‘in a collegial and academic spirit’ when he criticised colleagues over issues associated with climate change.
The second was student protests against Bettina Arndt’s proposed address to Sydney University’s Liberal Club as part of her ‘Fake Rape Crisis Campus Tour’. Despite the protest, Arndt’s speech went ahead. The Institute of Public Affairs subsequently published material criticising attacks on free speech on university campuses.
Robert French, chancellor of the University of Western Australia and a former chief justice of the High Court of Australia, was appointed to conduct an inquiry into free speech in Australian universities.
French released a 300-page Report of the Independent Review of Freedom of Speech in Australian Higher Education Providers on 6 April 2019. His conclusion was that Australian universities were not experiencing ‘systemic problems’ with freedom of speech. He nonetheless made several recommendations concerning the regulation of free speech on campuses, including the development of a Model Code which could be adopted/modified by universities.
In Open Minds Carolyn Evans and Adrienne Stone examine the French Report, academic freedom and freedom of speech on Australian campuses. They see their book as having two major aims. The first is:
… to provide the basis for better public discussion by providing some context for these events and an accessible account of the regulatory environment in which universities actually operate … The second …is to untangle [the] concepts [of academic freedom and freedom of speech].
In doing this they combine an historical approach with an analysis of how other English-speaking nations have responded to these issues. Most importantly, they provide a defence, if not celebration, of the importance of academic freedom, not so much for the internal operation of universities but for society and humankind more generally.
Evans and Stone see the key function of universities as being to seek knowledge and derive an understanding of the real world. This is not to say that those outside a university cannot perform these functions. After all, a university is more a state of mind than a place of work. If academics are to be able to seek knowledge they must be free (i.e. empowered) to carry out research, publish and teach, unencumbered by outside influences.
The ‘edge’ that academics have over others is the development of methodologies (which vary across different areas of academic inquiry) to test and develop explanations of the real world. Evans and Stone quote Melbourne University’s vice chancellor John Medley, who said in 1951, ‘Fear of ideas never made a democratic community, and if we encourage it we are denying the very basis of our creed.’ In many ways academic freedom is similar to notions of classic liberalism. At several points the authors reference John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty (1859) in their exposition of academic freedom.
However, they do not equate academic freedom with academics being able to say whatever they like on any issue that concerns them. Academic freedom only pertains to the area(s) of expertise in which they are trained. Speech in universities must be legal.
Academics, staff and students have no greater right than anyone else to defame, threaten, engage in racial and religious vilification, obstruct public roads or occupy public space in the name of freedom.
Freedom of speech means the freedom of academics and students to speak on issues outside their specific areas of expertise; though as Evans and Stone point out, the boundaries between the two may be difficult to delineate in practice. Their general line is that academics and students should have the same rights as other citizens to express themselves, subject to the qualification that such speech must be legal, and that if academics are speaking on issues outside their area of expertise, they should consider whether or not (probably not) to publicise their connection with a university. John Stuart Mill is cited again to say that such speech should not cause harm.
The authors’ overriding approach is to support speech and only to agree to limitations being placed on it if it is illegal or designed to cause harm and violence. Speech should not be banned because it causes persons to be upset or emotionally disturbed. Those who are upset can employ the techniques of academic discourse – the use of evidence and argument – to counter such speech. They point, for example, to increases in the number of international students and students from different multicultural backgrounds in universities who might be aggrieved by material presented in class. The solution is not to ban such exchanges but to provide an environment in which they can be discussed according to the methodological techniques of academe.
A bigger problem for academic freedom is private partnerships. Academic norms are for research results to be published and shared with others; the norms of private enterprise are to hoard and exploit ‘intellectual property’ for private profit. Evans and Stone say that university administrators should insist that research is openly available to all. Given the desire of both administrators and academics for research funds, especially in an environment in which government funding is being curtailed and universities are being admonished to be both more open to business partnerships and become entrepreneurial themselves, it is more than likely that this object will not be realised even where there are protocols saying that it should.
Open Minds describes how, in the 1950s and 1960s, the Menzies government and ASIO interfered in the operation of Australian universities to keep out so-called communists. There were a number of notable examples of scholars denied employment at some institutions who went on to have distinguished careers elsewhere. ASIO compiled a register of ‘communists’, the majority of whom were put on this list for advocating freedom of thought. The Vietnam War and conscription were associated with wide-scale student protests in the 1960s and 1970s, as were anti-apartheid protests against South African sporting tours. The student protests of recent years pale into insignificance compared with those of yesteryear.
Evans and Stone refer to the principles developed at the University of Chicago for ‘free, robust and uninhibited debate and deliberation’. While they prefer the Model Code developed by Robert French as more suitable for Australian circumstances, they are ‘impressed by the way the university [of Chicago] continuously engages with and reinforces its principles’ and recommend that:
Universities need to educate their staff and students about academic freedom and free speech and they need to work with commercial and governmental partners to ensure these values are well understood and respected in partnership agreements.
This is an important recommendation, which should provide both academics and students with a degree of comfort in that they have the support of university administrators to conduct research, publish and teach without fear or favour in these more parlous times where universities find themselves caught up in culture wars and fiscal restraint.
Evans and Stone have succeeded in placing current debates about academic freedom and freedom of speech into context in a clear and concise way which should be of interest not only to those who are or have been involved with universities, but also the broader public. Their greatest strength, however, is how they have highlighted the importance of academic freedom, the freedom for academics to conduct research, writing and teaching in a supportive environment in order to enhance knowledge and understanding of the world we all inhabit.
Carolyn Evans and Adrienne Stone with Jade Roberts Open Minds: Academic freedom and freedom of speech in Australia La Trobe University Press 2021 PB 224pp $29.99
Braham Dabscheck is a Senior Fellow at the Melbourne Law School at Melbourne University who writes on industrial relations, sport and other things. He recently completed a review article on employment in America and the introduction of a domestic transfer system in Australian soccer.
You can buy Open Minds from Abbey’s at a 10% discount by quoting the promotion code NEWTOWNREVIEW here or you can buy it from Booktopia here.
To see if it is available from Newtown Library, click here.
If you’d like to help keep the Newtown Review of Books a free and independent site for book reviews, please consider making a donation. Your support is greatly appreciated.
