July 10, 2024 • 8 mins
Otago University is signalling it has the backs of staff and students when it comes to free speech.
The University Council has confirmed its new Free Speech Statement, which aims to enable diverse idea exploration and encourage open exchanges.
Otago University Emeritus Professor James Maclaurin says this statement was 'absolutely essential'.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Heather. Do you think there was clown music on the
ferry bridge when they were panicking with the autopilot button? Hm,
Steve quite. I think there might have been a little
soundtrack of clown music going on there. So winniep and
New Zealand first proved correct on two things. Now, first
claim autopilot was on Ding correct. Second claim they couldn't
(00:21):
get autopilot off in time Ding correct. Third claim somebody
was off having a coffee. Now I'm starting to wander,
is it possible, Like it's very hard to believe that
there was absolutely nobody on that ship who knew that
you had to hold down the button for five seconds
to make it go off. Do you know what I mean?
In which case, is it possible that the person who
(00:41):
knew about that button and that you had to hold
it for five seconds was off having a wibi or
doing something?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
So like?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Partially right on claim three, I stand I stand by
to find out where that person was on the ship,
because they obviously weren't on the bridge trying to get
the button to go down for five seconds. Update on
Darlene Tana, she has broken her silence, She's spoken to
the Herald. She reckons that the leak of the report
that we had last night and which was also then
leaked to arn Z this morning, as designed to pressure her.
(01:13):
She says the leaks were intended to pressure her, but
she didn't speculate on who was behind them. Quote the
leak of the investigation report or part of it appears
to be another attempt to pressure me. She's also confirmed
she won't be pursuing a further inquiry. She says there's
no point in inquiring into whether the inquiry made the
right cause because that's just going to waste money. She
didn't want to have anything to say, like I had
nothing to say about what rachel Bert in the report
(01:34):
had found about her husband. Her insights not mine, Nor
can I speak for my husband. He's his own person
and how he engaged in the process was entirely up
to him. That speaks to the heart of this investigation.
He makes his own decisions about his business. He doesn't
have any obligation to close that disclose that information to me.
And then she was asked whether she would remain in
Parliament as an independent MP. She wouldn't say that. She
(01:55):
wouldn't say either way. She just said that she was
taking time to consider the report. She said, I gave
the Green Party my utmost patience throughout the investigative process.
I am disappointed they are not extending the same patients
with me, which actually is a fair call, isn't it.
Because she has been made to go home and take
some sicky leave, which in a weddled love for four months,
and in that time she waited for them to do
(02:16):
their thing. But then what they get the report on
Friday and they're like quit by Monday. I mean, maybe
they can make just give her a couple of days
to think about it. Twenty two away.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
From seven together do to see Alan.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
As we've discussed, Otago University has released its freedom of
speech policy and it's been called gold standard. The university
has promised not to restrict debate or deliberation, even when
it comes to ideas that could be seen as offensive
or immoral. Emeritus Professor James McLaurin led the working group
that put the statement together, and James is with us.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
He James, Hi, Heather, this.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Is surprisingly good from somebody sitting on the outside who
cares about free speech. I'm looking at this saying this
is surprisingly good. Was it a battle to get it
to this point.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
It's a long process. We've been working on this since January.
We put out a call that anybody in the university,
in all our campuses around the country could come and
talk to us in confidence, and so we've had a
huge number of discussions. The university is keen on doing this.
A lot of the universities have a free speech statement.
We didn't have one. We think it's essential. The university
(03:18):
has got to have one. So it's been exciting doing it.
It's good that it's done.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Did you have much internal opposition to this?
Speaker 2 (03:29):
Oh? We gave people a few questions that you know,
we thought they might come along having thought about. And
one is, you know, why does free speech matter? And
how much should a universe care about free speech? And
pretty much everybody who either came and talked to us
or wrote us something came with views about the importance
(03:50):
of free speech. Everybody thinks that it's important. Not everybody
thinks of it in quite the same way.
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Do you think, though, I mean, is it one of
those things where when you when you talk about free speech,
the proponents of free speech will argue for it. But
when a problematic speaker pipes up and says something problematic.
The other guys are suddenly going to find their voice
and have a problem. Then, like, your battle with this
policy is down the road yet.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Yeah, I guess in some ways it is. But you're
going to think. You know, if you think about the
people that we think about, the famous scientists and scholars,
you know, Darwin Newton, Copernicus, whoever, all those people, why
do they all have in common? They all had views
that all the people around them disagree with. So they
all had to fight to get a very different view
to be you know, taken seriously by people. So you know,
(04:38):
that's our heritage and we've got to grab onto that.
If you're if you're all about discovery and a university
should be, then this is something we've we've got to do.
We've got to own.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
James if the listener seven who spoke up about their
views on the tot ang Amori, we're not employed by
the University of Auckland, but we're employed by the University
of Otago right now with the policy in place, do
you reckon they would have been treated differently?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
It's hard to know because I'm not in the University
of Auckland. But I feel like they.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Would have because the chancellor, the Vice chancellor, Dawn Freshwater
obviously went publicans said that what they had said publicly
had upset people. So presumably under this policy, she wouldn't
have said something like that because you guys accept that
people will be upset and that's just how life is.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yeah, when people came and talk to us, they had
all sorts of ideas about, you know, what the standard
would be. We shouldn't upset people, we shouldn't defend people,
we should respect one another. You know, they all sound
like nice things, but they're all too ambiguous to have
us a standard. People just disagree about what's offensive, they
disagree about what it is to be respectful to one another,
so those things can't be the standard. And I guess
(05:51):
the other thing that we thought is, you know, New
Zealand's got plenty of problems to solve out there at
the moment, and we've got a pretty polarized world, and
we don't want to limit free speech in the university
where people are informed and want to have constructive debates
more than we limited you know, out on the streets
as it weren't. So we take this permissive view and
(06:13):
this idea that we want to get people with really
different ideas in the room together.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Why did you guys make the call that you have.
You have the ability to say though to outside speakers.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
So we think of this thing called university community that
has the staff and all our students and you know,
everybody who's connected with this with the university, including people
that we invite to come and work with us. All
those people we expect to have read this policy and
we are going to try and get them and boozed
about this policy and thinking that this is this is
(06:48):
the way for it. People who come from outside the
university and just say I want to rent a root,
you know, I want to have some sort of event there.
They're not in any sense, you know, bound by this policy.
As you just said before. You know, the future is
a big place. We don't know what's going to happen.
It's possible at some point in the future that somebody
comes along they want to hold an event that we
(07:10):
just think is way off face, is not the sort
of things we want to happen in university. So we
want to give ourselves a get out clause for that case.
But it's not the case. You know that's not for
our starting students.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Do you think that you're going to have a whole
bunch of parents around the country who are going to
want to send little Johnny and little Jill down to
Otigo University because of this policy? Because I'll tell you what,
it will appeal to a lot of people.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah. I am part on this working group because for
a long time I taught critical thinking, I teach philosophy,
and parents are very enthused about the idea that their
kids will get to university and be presented with difficult
problems and have to cope with, you know, disagreement and
(07:56):
discovering something they really thought was true turns out, you know,
probably not. You know, those are the things that we
want people to get out of university rather than just
wrote learning a bunch of facts. So I hope that
people will see this as a positive.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, absolutely, I think they will. James, he thank you
very much, really appreciate talking to you, as James McLaurin
Otago University Emeritus professor who helped them write the freedom
of speech policy. For more from Hither Duplicy Alan Drive,
listen live to news talks'd B from four pm weekdays
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio,
Heather. Do you think there was clown music on the
ferry bridge when they were panicking with the autopilot button? Hm,
Steve quite. I think there might have been a little
soundtrack of clown music going on there. So winniep and
New Zealand first proved correct on two things. Now, first
claim autopilot was on Ding correct. Second claim they couldn't
(00:21):
get autopilot off in time Ding correct. Third claim somebody
was off having a coffee. Now I'm starting to wander,
is it possible, Like it's very hard to believe that
there was absolutely nobody on that ship who knew that
you had to hold down the button for five seconds
to make it go off. Do you know what I mean?
In which case, is it possible that the person who
(00:41):
knew about that button and that you had to hold
it for five seconds was off having a wibi or
doing something?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
So like?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Partially right on claim three, I stand I stand by
to find out where that person was on the ship,
because they obviously weren't on the bridge trying to get
the button to go down for five seconds. Update on
Darlene Tana, she has broken her silence, She's spoken to
the Herald. She reckons that the leak of the report
that we had last night and which was also then
leaked to arn Z this morning, as designed to pressure her.
(01:13):
She says the leaks were intended to pressure her, but
she didn't speculate on who was behind them. Quote the
leak of the investigation report or part of it appears
to be another attempt to pressure me. She's also confirmed
she won't be pursuing a further inquiry. She says there's
no point in inquiring into whether the inquiry made the
right cause because that's just going to waste money. She
didn't want to have anything to say, like I had
nothing to say about what rachel Bert in the report
(01:34):
had found about her husband. Her insights not mine, Nor
can I speak for my husband. He's his own person
and how he engaged in the process was entirely up
to him. That speaks to the heart of this investigation.
He makes his own decisions about his business. He doesn't
have any obligation to close that disclose that information to me.
And then she was asked whether she would remain in
Parliament as an independent MP. She wouldn't say that. She
(01:55):
wouldn't say either way. She just said that she was
taking time to consider the report. She said, I gave
the Green Party my utmost patience throughout the investigative process.
I am disappointed they are not extending the same patients
with me, which actually is a fair call, isn't it.
Because she has been made to go home and take
some sicky leave, which in a weddled love for four months,
and in that time she waited for them to do
(02:16):
their thing. But then what they get the report on
Friday and they're like quit by Monday. I mean, maybe
they can make just give her a couple of days
to think about it. Twenty two away.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
From seven together do to see Alan.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
As we've discussed, Otago University has released its freedom of
speech policy and it's been called gold standard. The university
has promised not to restrict debate or deliberation, even when
it comes to ideas that could be seen as offensive
or immoral. Emeritus Professor James McLaurin led the working group
that put the statement together, and James is with us.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
He James, Hi, Heather, this.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Is surprisingly good from somebody sitting on the outside who
cares about free speech. I'm looking at this saying this
is surprisingly good. Was it a battle to get it
to this point.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
It's a long process. We've been working on this since January.
We put out a call that anybody in the university,
in all our campuses around the country could come and
talk to us in confidence, and so we've had a
huge number of discussions. The university is keen on doing this.
A lot of the universities have a free speech statement.
We didn't have one. We think it's essential. The university
(03:18):
has got to have one. So it's been exciting doing it.
It's good that it's done.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Did you have much internal opposition to this?
Speaker 2 (03:29):
Oh? We gave people a few questions that you know,
we thought they might come along having thought about. And
one is, you know, why does free speech matter? And
how much should a universe care about free speech? And
pretty much everybody who either came and talked to us
or wrote us something came with views about the importance
(03:50):
of free speech. Everybody thinks that it's important. Not everybody
thinks of it in quite the same way.
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Do you think, though, I mean, is it one of
those things where when you when you talk about free speech,
the proponents of free speech will argue for it. But
when a problematic speaker pipes up and says something problematic.
The other guys are suddenly going to find their voice
and have a problem. Then, like, your battle with this
policy is down the road yet.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Yeah, I guess in some ways it is. But you're
going to think. You know, if you think about the
people that we think about, the famous scientists and scholars,
you know, Darwin Newton, Copernicus, whoever, all those people, why
do they all have in common? They all had views
that all the people around them disagree with. So they
all had to fight to get a very different view
to be you know, taken seriously by people. So you know,
(04:38):
that's our heritage and we've got to grab onto that.
If you're if you're all about discovery and a university
should be, then this is something we've we've got to do.
We've got to own.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
James if the listener seven who spoke up about their
views on the tot ang Amori, we're not employed by
the University of Auckland, but we're employed by the University
of Otago right now with the policy in place, do
you reckon they would have been treated differently?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
It's hard to know because I'm not in the University
of Auckland. But I feel like they.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Would have because the chancellor, the Vice chancellor, Dawn Freshwater
obviously went publicans said that what they had said publicly
had upset people. So presumably under this policy, she wouldn't
have said something like that because you guys accept that
people will be upset and that's just how life is.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yeah, when people came and talk to us, they had
all sorts of ideas about, you know, what the standard
would be. We shouldn't upset people, we shouldn't defend people,
we should respect one another. You know, they all sound
like nice things, but they're all too ambiguous to have
us a standard. People just disagree about what's offensive, they
disagree about what it is to be respectful to one another,
so those things can't be the standard. And I guess
(05:51):
the other thing that we thought is, you know, New
Zealand's got plenty of problems to solve out there at
the moment, and we've got a pretty polarized world, and
we don't want to limit free speech in the university
where people are informed and want to have constructive debates
more than we limited you know, out on the streets
as it weren't. So we take this permissive view and
(06:13):
this idea that we want to get people with really
different ideas in the room together.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Why did you guys make the call that you have.
You have the ability to say though to outside speakers.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
So we think of this thing called university community that
has the staff and all our students and you know,
everybody who's connected with this with the university, including people
that we invite to come and work with us. All
those people we expect to have read this policy and
we are going to try and get them and boozed
about this policy and thinking that this is this is
(06:48):
the way for it. People who come from outside the
university and just say I want to rent a root,
you know, I want to have some sort of event there.
They're not in any sense, you know, bound by this policy.
As you just said before. You know, the future is
a big place. We don't know what's going to happen.
It's possible at some point in the future that somebody
comes along they want to hold an event that we
(07:10):
just think is way off face, is not the sort
of things we want to happen in university. So we
want to give ourselves a get out clause for that case.
But it's not the case. You know that's not for
our starting students.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Do you think that you're going to have a whole
bunch of parents around the country who are going to
want to send little Johnny and little Jill down to
Otigo University because of this policy? Because I'll tell you what,
it will appeal to a lot of people.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah. I am part on this working group because for
a long time I taught critical thinking, I teach philosophy,
and parents are very enthused about the idea that their
kids will get to university and be presented with difficult
problems and have to cope with, you know, disagreement and
(07:56):
discovering something they really thought was true turns out, you know,
probably not. You know, those are the things that we
want people to get out of university rather than just
wrote learning a bunch of facts. So I hope that
people will see this as a positive.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, absolutely, I think they will. James, he thank you
very much, really appreciate talking to you, as James McLaurin
Otago University Emeritus professor who helped them write the freedom
of speech policy. For more from Hither Duplicy Alan Drive,
listen live to news talks'd B from four pm weekdays
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio,
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.