Group 5 is the next group of amendments, and this group relates to institutional autonomy, academic freedom and freedom of speech. Amendment 166 is the lead amendment in this group. I call on Sioned Williams to move the lead amendment and to speak to the group. Sioned Williams.

Amendment 166 (Sioned Williams) moved

Thank you, Llywydd, and I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on group 5, and to specifically speak to amendment 166, tabled in my name. During our scrutiny work on the Bill as introduced, the Children, Young People and Education Committee was eager to ensure that this legislation and the new arrangements that will be created through it will maintain and extend the long-established principles in relation to academic freedoms—that is, that there needs to be freedom for our academic community to follow their own research interests, whatever the topic of that research may be, and that they need protection to do that, free from any prejudice or detrimental consequences, because that independence of opinion can challenge institutions, society, Governments and so on, but also enriches and enhances all our lives.

My aim in introducing the amendment is to build on the strengthening of the Bill during, and following, Stage 2, specifically section 17 of the Bill, as it appears before us today. Section 17(1) as currently drafted puts a requirement on the Minister and the commission to address the importance of safeguarding academic freedoms of tertiary education providers in Wales that provide higher education, to the extent that that freedom relates to HE and academic staff within those providers.

Members who will have read the Bill in detail, and I'm sure that you will all have done so, will see that the definition of a provider of HE is to be found in section 141 of the Bill, and that that includes the provision of education through a course. However, the activities of these institutions in relation to research and innovation is broader than providing education through courses, and they could include research programmes in the postgraduate sector and innovation projects. It's important, therefore, that there is safeguarding in terms of academic freedom relating to these activities too.

This amendment therefore further amends subsection 1 to ensure that that freedom does extend to research and innovation activities and to the provision of HE. I ask Members, therefore, to support this amendment, which will facilitate and provide clarity and further assurance on the length and breadth of this important provision. Thank you.

I'd like to start by thanking Sioned Williams for tabling this debate. I would like to move amendments 81, 82, 83 and 84. The purpose of these amendments is to reflect the content of clause 1 of the UK Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill, covering the governing bodies of higher education providers in Wales. This would mean that governing bodies must take steps to secure the freedom of speech within the law for staff members, students and visiting speakers. They also serve to compel governing bodies of tertiary education providers in Wales to maintain the code of practice setting out the matters referred to in subsection 2.

The code of practice would set out matters including the providers' values relating to freedom of speech and the upholding of it, procedures to be followed by staff and students in organising meetings and activities on the providers' premises, and any other matters that each governing body deems appropriate. The amendments also serve to ensure the defence of academic freedom and the freedom of speech within the Bill, as well as make it clear that frivolous or vexatious claims cannot be brought at private law. I would ask Members to support our amendments.

I support amendment 166 and have been pleased to collaborate with Sioned Williams on the content of the amendment. Although the amendment does not alter the definition of academic freedom fundamentally, it does clarify that tertiary education providers in Wales that provide research and innovation, in addition to those providing higher education, fall within the scope of the duties imposed on the Welsh Ministers and the commission to have regard to the importance of protecting the academic freedom of such providers, as well as of academic staff at those providers.

As at Stage 2, I resolutely reject the amendments tabled in the name of Laura Anne Jones in respect of freedom of speech, namely amendments 81, 82, 83 and 84.

Unlike the amendments at Stage 2, I note that these amendments now confirm that no statutory tort is created as a result of the breach of the proposed duties. Whilst amendment 84 may put beyond doubt that a failure by a tertiary education provider in Wales to perform these duties would not confer a cause of action at private law, this addition does not address my fundamental concerns with these amendments.

These amendments largely draw on the UK Government’s fundamentally flawed and misguided Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill. Far from enabling greater freedom of expression and breadth of debate in universities, their effect would risk stifling and suffocating free speech under greater bureaucracy.

As the parliamentary joint select committee on human rights concluded in its thorough investigation in 2018,

'the extent to which students restrict free speech at universities should not be exaggerated'.

A well-respected survey of students released just last week by the Higher Education Policy Institute found that the overwhelming majority of students report that they hear a variety of opinions expressed on campus, including those different from their own, and a similar majority feel comfortable expressing their own points of view.

I'm not convinced that there is a substantive threat to free speech at universities in Wales; rather, our institutions continue to be open and supportive environments where free and frank exchanges of ideas take place daily.

Members should also note that the law already places sufficient duties on education institutions to protect freedom of speech. The Education (No. 2) Act 1986 requires that governing bodies of higher and further education institutions in Wales

'take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the establishment and for visiting speakers'.

The 1986 Act also requires the institutions to publish and update a code of practice in discharging their duties in respect of freedom of speech, setting out procedures to be followed regarding meetings and the conduct of staff and students in connection with activities specified within the code. I am confident that these duties and universities' other duties under equalities and other legislation are sufficient to safeguard free speech.

I have tabled an amendment to these provisions of the 1986 Act, which will be discussed as part of group 18 in due course, to ensure the provisions remain up to date and operate as intended.

I call therefore on Members to join me in supporting amendment 166 and to reject amendments 81, 82, 83 and 84.

The question is that amendment 166 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Interruption.] Oh, I'm being corrected by a new Member of the Senedd, Sioned Williams—who is no longer a new Member, of course. Sioned Williams to reply to the debate before we move to the vote.

Thank you, Llywydd. Yes, I would just like to place on record that Plaid Cymru supports the Minister's views on the amendments tabled in the name of Laura Anne Jones, that is, 81, 82, 83 and 84. Freedom of speech is not unconditional, and, as was noted in the debate, we already have legislation to safeguard freedom of speech in HE institutions and to safeguard students and staff within those institutions from discrimination and harassment.

I'm pleased with the constructive collaboration between Plaid Cymru and the Government on this amendment, and the Minister's confirmation that the Government will support the amendment. It's appropriate that I also recognise the careful work undertaken by stakeholders, and that the stamp of their aspirations and their concerns and anxieties and the different views of sectors in Wales that they represent have been recognised and incorporated in this amendment. Thank you.

The question therefore is that amendment 166 be agreed to. Is there any objection? No. Therefore, amendment 166 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 81.

I think it was moved during the debate, moved by Laura Jones.

Amendment 81 (Laura Anne Jones) moved.

Move.

Is there objection to amendment 81? [Objection.] Yes, there is. Therefore, we'll move to a vote on amendment 81. Open the vote.

Amendment 81.

Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 81 is not agreed. 

Amendment 81: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 82—

—moved?

Amendment 82 (Laura Anne Jones) moved.

Move.

Yes, it's moved.

Amendment 82 is moved. Is there objection to amendment 82? [Objection.] Yes, there is. Therefore, we'll proceed to a vote on amendment 82. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 82 is not agreed.

Amendment 82: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 83.

Is it moved?

Amendment 83 (Laura Anne Jones) moved.

Move.

Yes.

Amendment 83 is moved. Is there objection to it? [Objection.] Yes. Therefore, we move to a vote on amendment 83. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 83 is not agreed.

Amendment 83: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 84 is moved.

Amendment 84 (Laura Anne Jones) moved.

Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection to amendment 84? [Objection.] Yes, there is. Therefore, we'll move to a vote on amendment 84. Open the vote.

Amendment 84.

Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 84 is not agreed.

Amendment 84: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected