Excited about the spring concerts I’ve just booked at Wigmore Hall:
Elisabeth Leonskaja & the Staatskapelle Quartett—Brahms C minor Piano Quartet & Quintet
András Schiff—surprise programme
Christian Gerhaher & Gerold Huber—Holliger, Schumann & Wolf Lieder
Hilary Hahn—solo Bach

Apologies for the typo while live-tweeting: Chakrabarti

Apologies for the typo while live-tweeting: Chakrabarti

Academic freedom watch 👀

Someone is now contesting amendment 17 explicitly stating academics' right to criticize their institutions, saying it's extraordinary. Go ahead, let a university test this under current law—this is already a cornerstone right of AF recognized by Strasbourg & hence via the HRA.

Johnson thinks the academic system of peer review (he calls it the marketplace of ideas, lol) already works to filter out charlatans, snake-oil pedlars & bullshitters who won't get established in the cannon. He argues it's impracticable to police boundaries of academic expertise.

Questions about Lord Wallace of Saltaire's amendments on evidentiary basis, field of expertise etc. Lord Johnson of Marylebone rightly argues this would be a brake on interdisciplinarity, saying it shouldn't be branded as 'epistemic trespass.'

Now some support from Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Natalie Bennett for Lord Triesman's amendment 14 inserting reference to the UNESCO 1997 Recommendation. That would be a very good move.

Getting a bit bored by this point. They would have saved a lot of time if (a) they didn't have this Bill and (b) they had just read (a summary of) the ECtHR case law that has already considered almost all of these issues already more intelligently—well, not room bookings 😂

This a good and important point.

Now Lord Willetts' 'pragmatic' amendments, presented by Lord Stevens in his absence. This is mainly about giving unis scope to postpone or move the location of an event, not cancel.

And now it gets worse. Earl Howe doesn't know the case of Butt v Home Secretary (he should also read
Akua Reindorf's report) and thinks that a speaker must already be invited or contacted before it can be an infringement of their FS. Duh!

For avoidance of doubt, I'm in favour of academic standards but not protecting institutional reputation or brand above academic freedom (because that would negate AF). This is exactly what Strasbourg case law does.

Only an hour before, they said that AF included the right to criticize one's own institution. Which is it? This government and those who drafted the Bill are completely and utterly incompetent, ignorant of the area of law in which the are legislating. A total dog's dinner.

The government now shows its complete ignorance of Strasbourg case law by saying that employers can sack an academic for not being able to properly represent the provider in terms of its values or reputation. WTF? Kharlamov, Palomo Sánchez?
James Murray UCU The Free Speech Union