|
senate vote 2021-03-15#8
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-07-15 08:02:33
|
Title
Higher Education Support Amendment (Freedom of Speech) Bill 2020 - in Committee- Higher Education Support Amendment (Freedom of Speech) Bill 2020 - in Committee - Enterprise agreement agreements
Description
-
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-03-15.177.1) introduced by Queensland Senator [Malcolm Roberts](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/malcolm_roberts) (One Nation), which means it failed.
- Victorian Senator Jane Hume (Liberal) [explained why](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-03-15.180.1) the Government would not be supporting the amendment:
- > *Employers and employees are free to make enterprise agreements which include terms that pertain to the employment relationship. The proposed amendment seeks to constrain university employers' and employees' ability to freely agree to the terms and conditions of employment in their enterprise agreement. It also seeks to constrain the standards and policies that universities may set in relation to freedom of speech and academic freedom. Item (b) of the proposed amendment is also unnecessary, as in practice it simply reflects the operation provisions in Mr French's proposed model code on freedom of speech and academic freedom. Effectively, the amendment proposes that other institutional policies should reflect and be consistent with the institution's policies on freedom of speech and academic freedom, which the government expects will be consistent with the model code.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 12), after item 3, insert:*
- >
- > *3A At the end of Subdivision 19-G*
- >
- > *Add:*
- >
- > *19-120 Provider's enterprise agreement to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom*
- >
- > *A higher education provider that is a *Table A provider or a *Table B provider must take reasonable steps to ensure that:*
- >
- >> *(a) any enterprise agreement under which academic staff of the higher education provider are employed includes provisions to uphold the freedom of speech and academic freedom of the provider's academic staff, consistent with the provider's policy under section 19-115; and*
- >>
>> *(b) no other provisions of such an enterprise agreement, or other policies or codes of conduct of the higher education provider, restrict or burden those freedoms of the provider's academic staff otherwise than in accordance with the provider's policy under section 19-115.*- >> *(b) no other provisions of such an enterprise agreement, or other policies or codes of conduct of the higher education provider, restrict or burden those freedoms of the provider's academic staff otherwise than in accordance with the provider's policy under section 19-115.*
-
-
|
|
senate vote 2021-03-15#8
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-07-15 08:01:50
|
Title
Bills — Higher Education Support Amendment (Freedom of Speech) Bill 2020; in Committee- Higher Education Support Amendment (Freedom of Speech) Bill 2020 - in Committee
Description
<p class="speaker">Malcolm Roberts</p><p>I move One Nation amendment (1) on sheet 1216 revised:</p>-
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-03-15.177.1) introduced by Queensland Senator [Malcolm Roberts](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/malcolm_roberts) (One Nation), which means it failed.
- Victorian Senator Jane Hume (Liberal) [explained why](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-03-15.180.1) the Government would not be supporting the amendment:
- > *Employers and employees are free to make enterprise agreements which include terms that pertain to the employment relationship. The proposed amendment seeks to constrain university employers' and employees' ability to freely agree to the terms and conditions of employment in their enterprise agreement. It also seeks to constrain the standards and policies that universities may set in relation to freedom of speech and academic freedom. Item (b) of the proposed amendment is also unnecessary, as in practice it simply reflects the operation provisions in Mr French's proposed model code on freedom of speech and academic freedom. Effectively, the amendment proposes that other institutional policies should reflect and be consistent with the institution's policies on freedom of speech and academic freedom, which the government expects will be consistent with the model code.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 12), after item 3, insert:*
- >
- > *3A At the end of Subdivision 19-G*
- >
- > *Add:*
- >
- > *19-120 Provider's enterprise agreement to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom*
- >
- > *A higher education provider that is a *Table A provider or a *Table B provider must take reasonable steps to ensure that:*
- >
- >> *(a) any enterprise agreement under which academic staff of the higher education provider are employed includes provisions to uphold the freedom of speech and academic freedom of the provider's academic staff, consistent with the provider's policy under section 19-115; and*
- >>
- >> *(b) no other provisions of such an enterprise agreement, or other policies or codes of conduct of the higher education provider, restrict or burden those freedoms of the provider's academic staff otherwise than in accordance with the provider's policy under section 19-115.*
<p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 12), after item 3, insert:</p><p class="italic">3A At the end of Subdivision 19-G</p><p class="italic">Add:</p><p class="italic">19-120 Provider's enterprise agreement to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom</p><p class="italic">A higher education provider that is a *Table A provider or a *Table B provider must take reasonable steps to ensure that:</p><p class="italic">(a) any enterprise agreement under which academic staff of the higher education provider are employed includes provisions to uphold the freedom of speech and academic freedom of the provider's academic staff, consistent with the provider's policy under section 19-115; and</p><p class="italic">(b) no other provisions of such an enterprise agreement, or other policies or codes of conduct of the higher education provider, restrict or burden those freedoms of the provider's academic staff otherwise than in accordance with the provider's policy under section 19-115.</p><p>I acknowledge that universities are required to enshrine in their policy statement clear messages around freedom of speech and academic freedom. While we can't intrude upon the enterprise agreements between universities and their employees, the amendment I put forward today requests that higher education providers take reasonable steps to ensure that enterprise agreements include provisions to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom. This commitment to academic freedom needs, wherever possible, to move beyond the policy statement that sits on the shelf gathering dust into the enterprise agreements, where it drives behaviour, since that is where cultural change will be brought about. It is not just policies but actions and behaviours that need to be changed.</p> <p class="speaker">Kim Carr</p><p>This is a proposition that, I'm afraid, hasn't been thought through in any great depth. This is a matter that's at the core of the High Court proceedings at the moment in regard to the Ridd matter. These are questions that go beyond the issue of free speech protections. They can't be overridden by other important workplace protections such as antidiscrimination legislation and policies of workplace occupational health and safety, or, for that matter, on measures such as hate speech and questions in regard to the incitement of violence. These are not matters that can be overridden in regard to discrimination or defamation. For a senator to suggest that we should do that is an extraordinary proposition.</p><p>These measures are quite important to the way in which universities function. As the chair of Universities Australia made clear, it goes to the question of the way in which academics communicate with one another as much as anything else. They are communities where you're able to impart fundamental knowledge and skills and to pass that on to new generations, and where you are able to vigorously debate matters—uncomfortable matters—but to do so with respect and courtesy and compassion and an understanding that you are expected to act in an expert and coherent manner. I'm afraid that, in the situation that has led to the circumstances in regard to James Cook University, those matters were absent. It wasn't a freedom of speech issue at all; it was a question about the way in which people sought to operate outside their areas of knowledge, their critiques, their dialogue, their capacity to treat each other. It goes to all the other matters I have mentioned, to important workplace protections that exist for all employees within the university system.</p><p>So Labor is not going to support this amendment. It's been ill-considered. It's part of an ideological obsession rather than a proper consideration of how we should ensure that our universities are run properly and are able to do their job properly for the advancement of the nation.</p> <p class="speaker">Mehreen Faruqi</p><p>The Greens are supportive of strong enterprise bargaining agreements developed with higher education workers and their unions. We are supportive of enterprise agreements that clearly protect academic freedom. But we are not supporting this amendment. Any legislative steps to ensure that academic freedom is incorporated into enterprise agreements should be treated with sensitivity and must be carefully considered before being brought into parliament.</p><p>This amendment was circulated just a few hours ago. As far as I know, Senator Roberts has not even consulted the National Tertiary Education Union about the implications of this amendment. Moreover, there is a clear need so far, Senator Roberts, as it relates to enterprise agreements, to distinguish academic freedom provisions from broader protections with respect to freedom of speech, and this amendment does not do that.</p> <p class="speaker">Jane Hume</p><p>The government will not be supporting this amendment, although it thanks One Nation for proposing it and respects the sentiment behind it. Employers and employees are free to make enterprise agreements which include terms that pertain to the employment relationship. The proposed amendment seeks to constrain university employers' and employees' ability to freely agree to the terms and conditions of employment in their enterprise agreement. It also seeks to constrain the standards and policies that universities may set in relation to freedom of speech and academic freedom. Item (b) of the proposed amendment is also unnecessary, as in practice it simply reflects the operation provisions in Mr French's proposed model code on freedom of speech and academic freedom. Effectively, the amendment proposes that other institutional policies should reflect and be consistent with the institution's policies on freedom of speech and academic freedom, which the government expects will be consistent with the model code.</p> <p class="speaker">Jess Walsh</p><p>The question is that the amendment be agreed to.</p> -
-
|