BUnison and BUCU have written to the University this week to seek clarifications regarding a plan to promote a vision of the University of Birmingham that we believe threatens to erode protections for academic freedom, misinterprets legal obligations on academic freedom and Equality law, and will bring the University into disrepute. University academics have a responsibility to pursue knowledge and truth, and have freedom within the law to question and test (research) received wisdom, to put forward controversial or unpopular opinions, and therefore to teach and carry out research without fear of interference or reprisal. 

In addition to Section 14 of the University Statutes, which specifies that the UNESCO Principles apply in their interpretation, a condition of the OfS Degree Awarding Powers is that the University academic community is independent and has oversight over teaching and award.

We have heard concerning reports that the following views have been expressed by the University Senior Management Team: that to fulfil “obligations to freedom of speech” the University of Birmingham must “remain politically neutral”; that committing to anti-racism and making efforts to address the legacies of colonialism in curricula and university practices are “not politically neutral;” and, therefore, that the University should no longer support an anti-racist culture on campus.

We need to explain that these ideas are quite simply incorrect, that they misunderstand the University’s obligations and would put the University Senior Management Team at odds with the entire staff of the University. 

There is no such thing as “political neutrality”, just as there is no such thing as scientific neutrality. Were management to adopt such a thesis, it would do the University of Birmingham no credit.

This is because research is not “neutral”.  The task of science is to make discoveries and change received wisdom, not repeat it in the name of “neutrality”. Perhaps this is obvious in the context of Chemistry. But this argument appears to be taking place in relation to subdisciplines within the Social and Historical Sciences. Stripped of its particulars, the proposition is that University authorities may engage in improper interference with the academic freedom of staff.

These statements also misunderstand the nature of Equality and Freedom of Speech law. Freedom of speech is legally restricted by several factors, including when the speech act is one of harassment, and when it is legitimately a matter of academic freedom. See Article 10, Freedom of Expression.

This legislation seeks a complex balance, and universities must be guided by the EHRC Technical Guidance 2015 and (recently) by the OfS statutory Regulations and Guidance on Sexual Harassment and Freedom of Speech.

The University is a Public Authority for the purposes of the Equality Act, which means that it must abide by the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). Public authorities must have due regard to the need to:

1. Put an end to unlawful behaviour that is banned by the Equality Act 2010,including discrimination, harassment and victimisation
2. Advance equal opportunities between people who have a protected characteristic and those who do not
3. Foster good relations between people who have a protected characteristics and those who do not

The PSED obliges public authorities not to maintain either stasis or “neutrality” in relation to unlawful discrimination. It requires them to act.

In a national and global context of increased far right governments, political sentiment, and violence, workplaces must maintain robust policies and procedures for challenging racism wherever and whenever it arises. It is the view of the trade unions that the university should not appease voices that seek to normalize racism and claim that challenging it is not a legitimate activity.  This is especially clear for an inclusive university operating in and serving a diverse community, as the University of Birmingham does, both nationally and internationally. Taking a so-called neutral position would threaten the University’s capacity to deal with individual and structural forms of racism, leaving Black and ethnically marginalized staff and students increasingly vulnerable to discrimination.

We have asked for a meeting to discuss with the University the Race Equality Charter application and the attempt in Council to impose a strategy that undermines the core principles of academic freedom.  Specifically, we want to discuss:

1. The legal and policy basis of the proposition of institutional neutrality, and how the proposition intersects with the University’s commitment to academic freedom, as laid out in section 14 of the University’s Statutes;
2. How the proposed changes would interact with the university’s equality, safeguarding and staff/student welfare duties with sector legislation and guidance on academic freedom and freedom of speech;
3. Any Equality Impact Assessment and Risk Assessment of the proposed strategy and its impact on current courses, ongoing research on colonial legacies, and staff protection for academic freedom and student inclusion;
4. The process that senior leadership has planned for consultation with staff, student representatives, and the trade unions.

There needs to be an open discussion and there should be consultation with the trade unions regarding what is a substantial shift in university strategy. What we have heard about this vision threatens to bring the University into disrepute, and breaches the Equality Act and the OfS guidance on academic freedom and freedom of speech.