That’s Debatable!

The EDI Tax

As Scotland’s Hate Crime and Public Order Act comes to the end of its first week, the number of ‘hate crimes’ reported to Police Scotland has ticked over the 8,000 mark. This was entirely predictable and no doubt reflects a combination of reporting by those keen to make use of the act’s censorious powers and mischievous attempts at exposing its almost comically authoritarian intent. What's also clear is how the new Act has quickly become a major distraction for Police Scotland, which needs to pay its officers overtime, handle the public relations fall out and continue to address ordinary crime. Having now welcomed nearly 1,000 new members to the Free Speech Union, we’ve set up a Hate Speech Hotline in case any of them get into trouble with the police about something they've said. We’ve also put an arrangement in place with Levy & McRea, a top firm of criminal lawyers in Scotland, so that if any of our members are arrested or interviewed under caution for something speech-related we can come to their aid. You can find the Hotline number, as well as detailed instructions about what to do if you’re arrested in Scotland for a speech-related offence in this set of FAQs, here. We move on to discuss a piece of research the FSU released in March entitled, “The EDI Tax: How Equity, Diversion and Inclusion is Hobbling British Businesses”. It was great to see our survey results reported in The Telegraph in an article that highlighted how nearly a quarter of employees going through EDI and/or climate training have been compelled to say things they don’t believe. The release of our report coincided with the publishing of the Inclusion at Work Panel’s recommendations, several of which alluded to problems akin to those uncovered in our survey. We end today with a discussion on Open Data, or rather the lack thereof. Writing in The Times, conservative MP for Harborough, Neil O’Brien, raises concerns that the failure of multiple government departments to publish granular migration data in the way that they used to is potentially frustrating an important debate.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

Scotland's Moment of Truth

By the time this episode of ‘That’s Debatable!’ is released, the not-so-new Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act will have come into force. We mark the occasion with a dive into an excellent piece by a concerned Scot, writing under the pseudonym C.J. Strachan. The article reaches back to 17th century Scottish history – the case of Thomas Aikenhead – and includes the powerful words that the 20 year-old wrote on the morning of his execution for blasphemy, “It is a principle innate and co-natural to every man to have an insatiable inclination to the truth, and to seek for it as for hid treasure”. With all that has been going on, listeners will not be surprised to hear that we have seen a marked uptick in the number of new FSU members living north of the border. We take a few moments, therefore, to explain how we are configured to support our Scottish members, including an overview of the FSU’s Scotland Office. There is good news to mark in the case of Rachel Maclean MP where we assisted in the successful scrubbing of a Non-Crime Hate Incident (‘NCHI’) against her name. We continue to support Murdo Fraser MSP who is facing a similar battle in Scotland. We end with some April Fools' Day fun, while remaining all too aware of how truth and absurdity are now more difficult to distinguish than ever.  
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

Around the Woke in Fifty Minutes

We’re in Jules Verne’s hands today as we travel around the woke world, from East Sussex in England to Scotland, the USA, the EU, China and beyond. We begin, though, with some research from Finland that was cited on X by Rolf Degen. He remarks on two large studies that suggest high critical social justice attitude scales are linked to anxiety, depression and a lack of happiness. Could this also explain why the silent majority on the non-woke side might reasonably be reluctant to jump into the fight? We're sure, though, that listeners will have discerned an increasing clamouring in recent days around the free speech implications of the Hate Crime Act in Scotland, from the Prime Minister expressing his concern to comedians taking a stand in Edinburgh. Scotland has also been in the news following the alleged recording of an NCHI (Non-Crime Hate Incident) against MSP Murdo Fraser, following a tweet he posted criticising the Scottish Government’s transgender policy. The story was carried by the Scottish Daily Mail and reports how the FSU has been helping Mr Fraser to back a legal challenge against Police Scotland. Next up, we discuss a report published by government advisor, Dame Sara Khan, which highlights threats to the UK’s social cohesion. It describes how 85% of the public believes freedom-restricting harassment currently occurs in the UK, with 60% believing the problem is worse than five years ago. Many of the findings link in with those of the research into anti-blasphemy extremism that we discussed in a previous episode. We also provide an update on the case of Professor Michelle Shipworth and examine an Unherd article by Sam Dunning that outlines the extent of Chinese interference with our higher education sector.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

Zero Tolerance

It's the first birthday of ‘That’s Debatable!’. We hope listeners will indulge us as we take a moment at the beginning of today's episode to look back over one or two of the segments from the last twelve months that have particularly resonated. First up on today’s main menu, however, is the ‘Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act’, which will now be activated on April Fool’s Day, nearly three years after it first received Royal Assent. The law creates new stirring up of hatred offences for protected characteristics including age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, and transgender identity. As Dr Stuart Waiton of Abertay University has reported in the Scottish Mail on Sunday, “From Section 4 of the Act itself, we find that saying something a ‘reasonable person’ would consider ‘insulting’ could be enough to see the long arm of the law reach into your living room”. He goes on to say, “What we are witnessing is a new type of authoritarianism – one that is clothed in the language of care and protection”. We continue with a discussion of Labour’s proposed Hate Crime Action Plan announced by Yvette Cooper. Worryingly, the proposal risks bringing back far more frequent recording of Non-Crime Hate Incidents (‘NCHI’), this after all the effort we have expended in getting these expunged from the records of people who have simply expressed a controversial view in the public square. We finish with a brief discussion of the latest report from Hope Not Hate, which focuses on what it calls the new ‘Radical Right’. This phenomenon allegedly “differs from the traditional far right in that it advocates an illiberal democracy rather than overthrow of the system itself”. Rather ludicrously, this leads to a document that lists senior Tories such as Jacob Rees-Mogg, John Redwood and Iain Duncan Smith in Section 3, its ‘Radical Right Feature’.
That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

J.S. Mill the Obscure

As reported in the Telegraph and in detail on our website, University College London (UCL) has now launched an investigation into its decision to ban academic and FSU member Michelle Shipworth from teaching a “provocative” course involving China in order to protect its commercial interests. The twists and turns in the story are quite breathtaking and include the startling moment when a UCL professor admits, “I have no idea who J.S. Mill is”. The whole drama is recounted today by Ben who has been involved in the case since Michelle first contacted the FSU for help. We also discuss a new report by Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens that blows the whistle on so-called anti-blasphemy extremism in the UK. The Times explains that the report was first commissioned by the government’s counterextremism chief and exposes links between activists at the forefront of recent protests in the UK and an extremist Islamist political party in Pakistan, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP). TLP was temporarily banned in Pakistan because of violent rallies and its support for mob execution of perceived blasphemers. Worryingly, the report reveals the emergence of a UK wing of TLP. As we discuss, it feels very late in the day for us to be waking up to this threat. Anti-blasphemy extremism is an affront to British values and is bad news for us all, but perhaps especially for our most vulnerable Muslim groups, such as the Ahmadis.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

Banning Islamophobia: Blasphemy Law by the Backdoor

The FSU has published an essay by Tim Dieppe (Head of Public Policy at Christian Concern) with a Foreword by Professor Richard Dawkins. Tim argues that any attempt to define ‘Islamophobia’ will have a chilling effect on free speech – and we agree. The dystopian graphic at the top of the paper underlines the point that if society were to accept the APPG’s definition of ‘Islamophobia’, and then do its best to eradicate it, we’d have to shut down every Islamic Studies department in Britain’s universities. Despite being ill-thought out and not fit for purpose, the APPG’s definition is gaining traction and is likely to become more entrenched, not less, over the coming years. Christianity is up next as we turn to an article in the Telegraph revealing that the Church of England is hiring a “deconstructing whiteness” officer to combat racial injustice. The Rt Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the Bishop of Dover, told Synod on 25th February that Anglicans needed to “further embed racial justice” and should not be afraid of being called “woke”. We discuss whether the Church of England might not be in danger of earning a rebuke akin to that received by the first century church in Laodicea. The trendy new Woke religion ends our line-up today as we discuss BBC partiality in its treatment of Justin Webb for saying, “trans women, in other words males” on BBC Radio 4 last August. We could do worse than quote former Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, from a recent article for the Daily Mail, “the problem is that the erasure of biological truth is becoming a professional practice by our media”.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

A Dark Day for Democracy

Many listeners will already be familiar with the name of Freddie Attenborough, the FSU’s Communications Officer, who joins us for today’s episode. Freddie writes our weekly newsletter, pens numerous free speech related articles and stoically mans the FSU’s social media fort twenty-four hours a day. It was great to have him with us, particularly in light of the astonishing scenes last week both inside and outside Parliament. The drama followed the Speaker’s decision to depart from convention by selecting Labour’s amendment in a debate on Gaza. It may not have been immediately apparent from the media reporting at the time but, as we discuss, free speech was very much at the heart of the incident. Freddie has written a superb piece about this dark day for our democracy. We fear such scenes could become more common if a future government were to adopt the APPG (All Party Parliamentary Group) 2017 definition of Islamophobia. As Ben points out, under this definition even historians of late antiquity could be deemed Islamophobic if they write about the historical spread of Islam in the wrong way. There is good news to report in the world of policing, following the establishment of a new Police SEEN group. SEEN stands for ‘Sex Equality and Equity Network” and the group's aim is to push back against the influence of LGBT lobby groups and activists within the service. We end today’s episode by asking Freddie about his hopes and concerns for freedom of expression in the UK over the coming years and he provides some insight that will definitely need further exploration in a future episode.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

Reignite the Free Speech Spark

Since its establishment in March 2023, the Ian Mactaggart Programme has provided generous financial support to a range of free speech initiatives among young people. One particularly exciting project is the inaugural ‘Modern Dissent’ lecture. This will be given by Professor Eric Kaufmann, FSU Advisory Council member and Head of the Centre for Heterodox Social Science at the University of Buckingham and will take place on Wednesday 28th February (tickets available here). Moving to the arts world, Arts Council England (ACE) funded Soho Theatre had to apologise last week for the behaviour of one of its performers who subjected several Jewish members of the audience to verbal abuse. As the apology makes clear, this was an appalling incident, but The Telegraph also reported that it may have been the catalyst for a broader debate around ACE’s new Relationship Framework, released in January of this year. According to the new framework, political or activist statements made by individuals linked to ACE-funded projects – even if they were in a personal capacity and not directly related to the work they were making – could cause reputational risk and ultimately breach funding agreements. Given the ongoing threat to freedom in the arts that we see across the UK, it is encouraging to hear that ACE has since released a statement that the new framework is back under review following concerns raised. There is also the news that Simon Fanshawe OBE has been elected rector of the university of Edinburgh. As Freddie Attenborough reports on our website, this has led to a predictable backlash from transgender rights activists. We end by drawing listeners’ attention to an excellent article in The Critic this week by Professor Alan Sokal. He surveys the state of free speech in the West and his piece serves as a useful pointer to much of the great thinking that has come before us, including John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty”.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.
 

Standing with Salman

There is a lot going on behind the scenes at the Royal Society of Literature (RSL), as reported this week in The Times and written up in detail on the FSU website. Several current fellows of the RSL, including three former presidents, say that the organisation’s refusal to take public stands on authors Kate Clanchy and Sir Salman Rushdie has called into question its support for a writer’s right to freedom of expression. Kate Clanchy won the Orwell Prize in 2020 but suffered the ire of an online mob when activists discovered a handful of sentences that deployed what they described as ‘racial stereotypes’. Ahead of a speech in August 2022, Sir Salman was attacked on stage by an Islamist sympathiser and stabbed multiple times, in the chest, liver, hand, face and neck. The response from the RSL was best summed up by Sir Salman himself in a post on X, “Just wondering if the Royal Society of Literature is ‘impartial’ about attempted murder? (Asking for a friend.)” For our other main segment, we discuss Army Guidance that encourages soldiers to avoid Christian elements in Acts of Remembrance and says that Acts of Remembrance should be separated from Remembrance Services. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised, given the 93 diversity networks now active across the Ministry of Defence.
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.

The Stadium Stasi

Our first story, which was reported in The Telegraph over the weekend, has hit a nerve with the nation. Millions have now watched the short video put together by Toby Young with Newcastle United fan – and FSU member – Linzi Smith. During an investigation into Linzi’s perfectly lawful gender critical tweets, NUFC asked the Premier League to scrutinise her further. The League’s investigation unit, based in London and embedded in its legal department, did exactly that and came back with a detailed dossier. The cache of documents refers to Linzi as the “target”, contains photos in which she can be seen walking her dog and includes a note that she has "ties" to nearby Whitley Bay. In East Germany, at least, everyone tended to assume that the Stasi was watching them. We certainly don’t expect covert investigations to be directed at British citizens by private companies. As well as incredibly chilling, we believe that it could be a breach of Linzi’s GDPR rights and she has raised a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (‘ICO’). We end today with a discussion on the resignation of justice minister Mike Freer who will step down at the next election following a string of Islamist threats and incidents. What does it mean for free expression when elected representatives who do their job by speaking out for their constituents ultimately decide that the risk to their personal safety is just too great?  
‘That's Debatable!’ is edited by Jason Clift.