UCLAN suppressing freedom of speech?

Nobber

Forum Patron
Patron
Sebastian Walsh had made comments about halal meat and of the alleged Islamisation of the UK during a seminar about food standards.


Sebastian has now been suspended from UCLan lectures until the end of the academic year unless he takes part in a ‘diversity training course’. The university said official complaints had been made about his remarks.

 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
This story is a prime candidate for the Political Correctness thread.

VERY disappointed in UCLAN. Based on that LEP story... assuming there's nothing more to it... it is absolutely shocking.

The person who made the decision to ban him (until JUNE FFS - presumably whilst still paying his 9 grand a year fees??)... it's that person that needs to be suspended and sent on an "Importance of Free Speech in British Academia" course.
 

raefil

Forum Patron
Patron
Preston UKIP in dispute with UCLan over student's halal meat comments






A university student was banned from lectures after he made “offensive and inappropriate” comments about halal meat and the ‘Islamisation of the UK’. But members of UKIP have urged the University of Central Lancashire (UCLan) to drop the “tyrannical ruling” and uphold the values of free speech.

During a seminar about food standards Sebastian Walsh, who is from Burnley but lives in Wigan , had made critical comments about halal meat and of the alleged Islamisation of the UK. Sebastian has now been suspended from UCLan until the end of the academic year unless he takes part in a ‘diversity training course’.

A UCLan spokesman said: “A number of official complaints were made by students regarding a series of offensive and inappropriate comments made by Sebastian Walsh during lectures and seminars. “We cannot divulge the actual comments made by Sebastian as they formed part of a confidential investigation. However, they clearly breached a number of the university’s conduct regulations, including those relating to harassment and bringing the university into disrepute. “In line with our official procedures, an investigation ensued, and a disciplinary hearing took place. The student has been temporarily suspended for the remainder of the academic year and is aware that on the successful completion of a diversity training course, he will be able to resume his studies.”

But Preston’s UKIP party has written to deputy vice-chancellors Lynne Livesey and Liz Bromley at UCLan asking them to allow Sebastian back to class based on the right to freedom of speech. Preston UKIP treasurer Neil Graham said: “Freedom of speech and freedom of thought are essential to liberty and essential to learning. They are fundamental to democracy itself. "It doesn’t matter whether Mr Walsh’s views are correct or not: he has the right to express them. The university is denying him his freedom and is now denying him his right to an education. "This authoritarianism is entirely out of place in a free society. Members were truly shocked to hear of Mr Walsh’s experience. "We believe that someone has to make a stand so we urge the university to abandon this tyrannical ruling and to revise its policies to prevent further injustice."

Puts a bit more meat on the bones.
 

Nobber

Forum Patron
Patron

pnematic

Manager
These snowflakes ( aided and abetted by right on lecturers)will one day leave their safe space and emerge into the real world.

A world where you ll be challenged by your peers , your bosses , your customers , society at large. Armed with a degree , one would hope they secure a position of seniority , responsibility and tough decisions.

A world of negotiations , compromise, empathy , tolerance ,understanding.

I m sad to report they ll be fuckin eaten alive. Seriously their very well being will be affected leading to all sorts of issues that they are unable to deal with.

In a way it’s cruel.

And tragic.
 

pnematic

Manager
Incidentally my post was a generalisation of higher education establishments - the shutdown of debate and non platforming.

Not necessarily this case.
 

Liberation

Forum Patron
Patron
Sebastian Walsh had made comments about halal meat and of the alleged Islamisation of the UK during a seminar about food standards.


Sebastian has now been suspended from UCLan lectures until the end of the academic year unless he takes part in a ‘diversity training course’. The university said official complaints had been made about his remarks.

Do we actually know what was said because that report gives no details whatever?


Typical question and typical answer these days


Close down speech.


Supported by the fact that Uclan won't actually divulge what was said.......................... Pfffffffffft
 

raefil

Forum Patron
Patron
Typical question and typical answer these days


Close down speech.


Supported by the fact that Uclan won't actually divulge what was said.......................... Pfffffffffft
They did give a few clues though.

Offensive and inappropriate comment

Hes from Burnley

Oh and UKIP are supporting him ;)
 

Akademik

Reserve
Freedom of speech does not mean you can just say what you want, when you want - which is why it fully depends what was actually said.

"In 1998, the United Kingdom incorporated the European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression it contains in Article 10, into its domestic law under the Human Rights Act. However, there is a broad sweep of exceptions including threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace (which has been used to prohibit racist speech targeted at individuals),[155][156][157] sending any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety (which has been used to prohibit speech of a racist or anti-religious nature),[158][159][160] incitement,[161] incitement to racial hatred,[162] incitement to religious hatred"

If the comments cause any of the above underlined then the professor is well within his rights to stop it.
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
Freedom of speech does not mean you can just say what you want, when you want - which is why it fully depends what was actually said.

"In 1998, the United Kingdom incorporated the European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression it contains in Article 10, into its domestic law under the Human Rights Act. However, there is a broad sweep of exceptions including threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace (which has been used to prohibit racist speech targeted at individuals),[155][156][157] sending any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety (which has been used to prohibit speech of a racist or anti-religious nature),[158][159][160] incitement,[161] incitement to racial hatred,[162] incitement to religious hatred"

If the comments cause any of the above underlined then the professor is well within his rights to stop it.
I've heard these 'caveats' on free speech before, but seeing it written like that (presumably wiki)... to be honest, I'm not really happy with the definition used in the law. Too open to be interpreted in a way that could close down almost any impassioned debate on religion.
 

pbc373

Forum Patron
Patron
These snowflakes ( aided and abetted by right on lecturers)will one day leave their safe space and emerge into the real world.

A world where you ll be challenged by your peers , your bosses , your customers , society at large. Armed with a degree , one would hope they secure a position of seniority , responsibility and tough decisions.

A world of negotiations , compromise, empathy , tolerance ,understanding.

I m sad to report they ll be fuckin eaten alive. Seriously their very well being will be affected leading to all sorts of issues that they are unable to deal with.

In a way it’s cruel.

And tragic.
I hope to God if that's the case, they are served Halal:)
 

Akademik

Reserve
I've heard these 'caveats' on free speech before, but seeing it written like that (presumably wiki)... to be honest, I'm not really happy with the definition used in the law. Too open to be interpreted in a way that could close down almost any impassioned debate on religion.
It was Wiki, but the general point is found everywhere even if the wording is slightly off.
I wouldn't call them caveats - what is the point of free speech if you are using it to try and suppress others human rights? Or make them feel like they aren't entitled to their own freedom of thought. This is especially an issue in controlled environments such as universities - rather than public spaces around the city.
The other problem lies with the definition of debate. You can't just insult someone, or a religion and call it a debate. You can have constructive discussions/disagreements about it, making valid points - but not insults. This also follows on to my points about what was actually said in the class.
 

Liberation

Forum Patron
Patron
Freedom of speech does not mean you can just say what you want, when you want - which is why it fully depends what was actually said.

"In 1998, the United Kingdom incorporated the European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression it contains in Article 10, into its domestic law under the Human Rights Act. However, there is a broad sweep of exceptions including threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace (which has been used to prohibit racist speech targeted at individuals),[155][156][157] sending any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety (which has been used to prohibit speech of a racist or anti-religious nature),[158][159][160] incitement,[161] incitement to racial hatred,[162] incitement to religious hatred"

If the comments cause any of the above underlined then the professor is well within his rights to stop it.

Bollocks.............. The above covers a multitude( almost all actually) of sins and who the bloody hell determines what is eg.." insulting/distress/harrassment etc etc ? ...... Law or not....What a load of crap.
 

raefil

Forum Patron
Patron
The Irony here is that you can bet your Mortgage that the offended person was not a Muslim, it will have been a lefty white priviledge doo-gooder happy clapper.
could have been quite a few folk offended if this was a far right prick coming out with racist tropes?

We dont know though, do we, until all the facts come out.
 
Top