Sussex University fighting the fine

[highame]

Apparently the fine is too much and the Office for Students shouldn't have levied such a huge amount. Hope they've got their house in order. No guarantees though www.thetimes.com/article/aa2807e6-ffec-4107-8b32-e115b3bb7bc8?shareToken=7eb40730d765ed9b7a84d40ff79c6f55

That's a risky little game. They are going to end up losing so much more money.

At least Kathleen Stock isn't being dragged through the mill thus time

The reduced fine isn't even that large, viewed in the context of university finances. The original fine would have been a more appropriate deterrent.

“The consequence of the decision for the university has been severe, particularly its impact on the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech,” he said.

PMSL. Sussex is pretty much at the bottom of the list of universities in the UK that merits that description.

Chris Buttler KC, for the university, said the case concerned the “institutional autonomy of universities to foster civility and tolerance on campus”.
“The consequence of the decision for the university has been severe, particularly its impact on the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech,” he said.

"the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech” ?
I think that train left the station a long time ago, Mr Buttler😏

The trouble is, gender is so entrenched that this action will have more to do with thwarting gender critical wins, that cost.

On the Beeb too. This should be good.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czjg8mlxnvwo

I saw something somewhere that Doc Stock's research has brought 100ks of grants in for the University.

In the TES summary of the University's defence I'm sure one of the arguments was that only the King had the authority to tell them off.

What a joke! The problem is not the fine… it’s that the university is obviously bonkers! Who in their right mind would encourage their DC to pay them £9000 a year to absorb their counter factual garbage? Honestly they are completely detached from reality (and riddled with RAAC)

how much more could this cost them if they lose? And if they win - can the OfS appeal? I think if the OfS did a 3 year investigation, they surely must have ticked all boxes, dotted all I's and crossed all T's....

Gosh I really hope this fails. Are there any legal types on here with a view?

Archived link; https://archive.ph/mgD9j

If I remember rightly, the OfS 'judgement' was about a lot more than how KS was treated, it was about course content, rules and regs, oppressive pro-gender-ideology atmosphere and environment at all levels.

That's just from memory.

HERA states that the governing body has a duty to* *secure freedom of speech within the law for visitors, students and staff.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/29/section/A1

From Google searches;
''The Higher Education and Research Act 2017 (HERA) includes a power for the OfS to impose a monetary penalty on a higher education provider if it appears to the OfS that that there is or has been a breach by the provider of one of its ongoing registration conditions...''

Freedom of speech is a condition of registration.

It has statutory powers to impose financial penalties of up to £500,000 or two per cent of a university’s income from tuition fees and grants (whichever is highest).

The fine isn't very big. Sounds like they are using this as a vehicle to restore their supposed reputation, while spaffing away yet more money in legal fees on a case they might well lose. And further publicising the reason they lost their reputation.

FGS, that fine is not high. They pay their VCs 300+k p/a. Michael Farthing got a £230k golden goodbye, his successor, Adam Tickell, was bunged £17k in relocation costs alone, now yet another well-remunerated seat-warmer wants carte blanche to indoctrinate, & for her staff & students to abuse, threaten & defame, all while feigning concern for an academic freedom her institution has never defended.

This is a link to the article in the TES that i mentioned upthread

University of Sussex calls OfS fine ‘irrational’ as High Court case begins https://share.google/57FH9RCwntprKsEpM

Thanks to @PrettyDamnCosmic who found and pasted the archive. There's a link at the bottom detailing the amount of moolah Sussex coined from Doc Stock and her research.

What reputation as a bastion of free speech is that? It seems that they're in the bunker, ordering deployments of long dead divisions to counter the GC armies marching East!

“The consequence of the decision for the university has been severe, particularly its impact on the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech,”

Bastion of free speech, my middle-aged sagging arse!

The Office for Students (OfS) has fined the University of Sussex £585,000 after an investigation found the university’s governing documents failed to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom, as well as failings in the university’s management and governance processes.
......
The OfS does not currently have a role to act on behalf of any individual. Its investigation was therefore focused on the university’s compliance with the OfS’s regulatory requirements, rather than the particular circumstances relating to Professor Stock.
The OfS has concluded that:

1. The University of Sussex’s Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement failed to uphold the freedom of speech and academic freedom public interest governance principles set out in the OfS’s regulatory framework. This breached OfS condition E1.
2. The University of Sussex failed to have adequate and effective management and governance arrangements in place to ensure that it operated in accordance with the delegation arrangements set out in its governing documents, including its scheme of delegation. This breached OfS condition E2.

The investigation also found that a chilling effect arose as a result of the Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement and the resulting breach of condition E1. By ‘chilling effect’, the OfS means the potential for staff and students to self-censor and not speak about or express certain lawful views. Staff and students may have self-censored as a result of the policy because they were concerned about being in breach of the policy and potentially facing disciplinary action for expressing lawful views.
.....
Specifically, the OfS is concerned that the university may not have complied, or acted compatibly, with:

• Section 43 of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 (duty relating to freedom of speech)
• Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to freedom of expression)
• Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010 (indirect discrimination)
• The Public Sector Equality Duty.

University of Sussex fined £585,000 for free speech and governance breaches - Office for Students

“The consequence of the decision for the university has been severe, particularly its impact on the university’s reputation as a bastion of free speech,”

Had they been that KS wouldn't have been hounded the way she was, has this pilched seen the pics of what those toerag students were allowed to do in this "bastion of free speech,”

I don't know if they stand a chance of winning, I hope they don't.

I'd like to see the same amount of money they spend in trying to get out of paying this added to the amount that they have to pay KS. 😁

I wonder if Sussex thinks because they've made lots of changes, under duress, they should now be let off. So hey, lets have another court case. We're the good guys. My arse they are

The University's behaviour obviously not good, but what happens to the money? Does the government just keep it for whatever they like? How many students lose out when a university has to pay out half a million pounds?

I would be surprised if the OfS’s remit were limited to governance documents. If it were universities could get away with murder (well yes, we did have a policy to stone GC staff to death, but it wasn’t a governance document).

Also presumably they are not denying what happened and how little official support Stock got. Chilling effect puts it mildly.

Part of a wave of current law actions challenging court decisions basically saying 'yes that might be the law but we don't like it and we identify as being the good guys'. I sincerely hope we see all of them shut down with a very firm hand, or we might as well sign up with Trump.

They think the fine is what damaged their reputation - what fucking idiots.