McDowall JamesEDUCATION AND TRAINING (FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION) AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): I move That the Education and Training (Freedom of Expression) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I further nominate the Education and Workforce Committee to consider this bill.As we go through my bill this evening I hope that we can all reflect on how fortunate we are to be able to freely participate in the process and debate the issue at hand. We've certainly been doing that this evening. How about that? Two ACT bills in a row. Get used to it. This is the essence of liberal democracy. In this context it is easy to take free speech for granted and open debate as well particularly as we are operating under the guise of parliamentary privilege. That being said we should never take freedom itself for granted. Free speech is fundamental. It is the cornerstone of liberal democracy and a proven method to confront tyranny injustice and oppression.In the lead-up to this bill I have spoken about freedom of speech and academic freedom. These are actually distinct concepts. Freedom of speech an ideal within the broader construct of freedom of expression is the ability to express one's thoughts without restriction so long as you are not harming others or inciting violence on others. Academic freedom on the other hand is the ability of academics and students to question ideas and to put forward new ones without being censored or worse risking your career or enrolment status. For academics it is crucial that they are able to teach and undertake research that challenges the status quo even if it's a bit unorthodox if they choose to do so.Universities are by their design centres of inquiry and intellectual debate most of the time by which new ideas are brought to life and tested. Virtually every scientific breakthrough and accomplishment throughout history has pushed the boundaries of their times. They were often criticised by academic institutions as immoral and offensive but are now accepted as fact.This bill requires that tertiary institutions protect freedom of expression and gives them significant say over how they do so within existing laws. The bill enables them to issue codes of practice that are set out in procedures that students and staff should follow to uphold freedom of expression. Universities will need to take responsibility to maintain lawful freedom of speech for their faculty students and visiting speakers.Having such a process actually helps universities as it enables them to clearly identify when a speaker presents a real risk of inciting harm or criminal activity while protecting those who may have unorthodox or slightly strange or controversial views but are otherwise harmless. Massey University released their own policy—of sorts—on freedom of speech which cites mental harm to students as a reason that speakers may be de-platformed or events cancelled. This is entirely open-ended and subjective and it will result in a process that is informal and behind closed doors. Taxpayer-funded institutions through their management should not be forcing whatever world view they have and that they possess on students using dubious claims to do so.A recent survey conducted by Curia Market Research on behalf of the Free Speech Union gathered over 1200 responses from university-employed academics. In the findings almost half of the respondents felt constrained to raise differing perspectives and to argue against the consensus—and even more so in discussing the Treaty. On the latter almost a third ranked themselves as feeling very unfree. If academics feel unable to speak out on any issue this will have long-run and long-term consequences and effects on students. Their ability to engage in critical thinking will be diminished.The results of this survey are troubling and they show that the issues are real here in New Zealand universities. Universities should be environments of genuine diversity and open debate with the free exchange and exploration of ideas without fear yet the survey demonstrates that there is fear and it is only getting worse. If we do not confront these issues we risk not only losing our freedom but also our problem-solving abilities. It is frankly disappointing that we are even here debating this issue in 21st century New Zealand. In a healthy culture people are allowed to say unpopular things.Simeon Brown: Careful!Dr JAMES McDOWALL: Speech isn't—yeah. Speech isn't about left versus right believe it or not. As part of the broader attack on liberalism—Simeon Brown: He needs to be cancelled!Dr JAMES McDOWALL: Gee they're upset now. Freedom of speech has been contested on both sides of the political spectrum. Shanan Halbert: What about homophobic ones? Transphobic?Dr JAMES McDOWALL: While in contemporary discussions it tends to be pushed by those on the right for sure history clearly shows that freedom of speech was the key enabler in many social justice issues pioneered by the left even if they refuse to believe it—like right now. Kate Sheppard was likely one of New Zealand's greatest speakers but her views were radical at the time. We nevertheless became the first country in the world to have universal suffrage to give women the vote when Parliament passed the 1893 Electoral Act and it is one of our greatest achievements made possible in a culture that enabled free speech.The anti - Springbok tour is another example. It would not have been as successful as it was had it had been an environment where we weren't allowed to make unpopular statements. In modern times we have seen the likes of the group Speak Up For Women repeatedly being shut down. I'm not saying I necessarily support everything they say but regardless. And of course I have to mention the case—the famous case—of Don Brash and Massey University's decision to cancel him despite the fact that he was only going to go there to talk about his political career. Even the Prime Minister from that party over there called their refusal to host Brash an overreaction. Minister Hipkins said he wouldn't have cancelled him either and that universities should have a very high threshold around allowing free speech enabling it and having robust debate. What a good idea. Thank you Minister Hipkins. We also have seen issues such as posters at Massey University supporting the Hong Kong protests being torn down and Auckland University of Technology scrapping Tiananmen Square commemorations after the Chinese Government communist officials intervened.Freedom of speech is a core principle in classical liberalism and should be protected by law in any democratic nation. It is worth noting that here in New Zealand it is neither entrenched in law nor absolute. Instead freedom of expression is loosely protected by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. In theory the law enforces the right to speak associate to think and to participate in the democratic process. Liberalism emphasises tolerance and dignity. A person does not have to agree with their fellow citizens about important issues but acknowledge that each individual should get to decide what they are who they are what they think and how they express themselves without interference from the State. In theory liberalism lowers the temperature of politics though I think this evening it's not working out so well so it probably reflects more on what's happening on the Government side over there.Human dignity is about people having an equal right to autonomy and freedom of choice. Every individual wants to shape their lives as they see fit.Shanan Halbert: Freedom of choice to be transphobic!Dr JAMES McDOWALL: If a significant part of society rejects liberal principles and seeks to fundamentally restrict speech then dignity is lost identities take over and liberalism can no longer maintain peaceful political order. The Government's proposed hate speech laws which are being developed under a veil of secrecy could significantly challenge this inherent dignity.In closing I would say that we can be certain that the threats to free speech are not limited to our university campuses. The effects can be felt throughout society—chilling effects. This bill is none the less a positive step to mitigate the growing phenomenon of woke cancel culture in places of learning where open debate should be protected and encouraged. I commend my bill to the House.