The debating society of Bangor University has banned Reform UK MP Sarah Pochin from speaking to students, saying it is taking a “stand against Reform UK” and “keeping hate out of our universities”. The Telegraph has the story.
Bangor University’s debating and political society refused to host an event with Sarah Pochin, MP for Runcorn and Helsby, claiming that it was “keeping hate out of our universities”.
The university insisted it was “politically neutral and supports freedom of speech” and said it had no role in the society’s decision.
Universities are required to “promote the importance” of free speech by the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act.
Pochin had planned to visit the university with Jack Anderton, a party adviser who is touring universities to speak to students.
But the society declined to welcome them to the Welsh university because of claimed “racism, transphobia, or homophobia displayed by the members of Reform UK”.
A spokesman said: “The Debating & Political Society received a request from Jack Anderton and Sarah Pochin MP of Reform UK to attend Bangor University and give a Q&A to students. In line with our values, this request was refused.
“We stand by this decision as a committee. We have zero tolerance for any form of racism, transphobia or homophobia displayed by the members of Reform UK. Their approach to the lives of others is antithetical to the values of welcoming and fair debate that our society has upheld for 177 years.
“We are proud to be the first of the debating unions to take a stand against Reform UK. We strongly implore our fellow societies to join us in keeping hate out of our universities.”
Pochin said: “So much for free speech in our universities. How can Bangor University’s debating society be afraid of debate?”
Prof James Orr, a senior adviser to Nigel Farage added: “The decision by a ‘debating and politics’ society at Bangor University to ban a Member of Parliament from speaking on its premises is a disgrace.
“In a crowded field, it’s the worst breach of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 I have ever come across.”
Worth reading in full.
See Related Article Below
The debating society that refuses to debate
Students at Bangor University are preventing discussion in the name of free speech.
ANDREW DOYLE
The self-satirising quality of social justice activists never ceases to disappoint. This time it’s the Debating and Political Society at Bangor University which, in spite of the society’s name, has refused a request to hold a Q&A with political campaigner Jack Anderton and Reform MP Sarah Pochin. The society’s statement said it all: ‘Reform UK are not welcome at Bangor University’.
The society’s justification for its decision read like typical activist boilerplate, with the compulsory clutching of pearls:
‘We have zero tolerance for any form of racism, transphobia, or homophobia displayed by the members of Reform UK. Their approach to the lives of others is antithetical to the values of welcoming and fair debate that our society has upheld for 177 years.’
Not content with declaring that a democratically elected Member of Parliament was too controversial for public events, and that free speech can only be upheld by preventing certain people from speaking, the society implored other student groups ‘to join us in keeping hate out of our universities’.
Once again, we see how the nebulous concept of ‘hate’ is being weaponised to prevent open discussion. The reinterpretation of Reform’s policies as evidence of ‘hatred’ is to condemn what polls repeatedly tell us is the position of the majority of the British electorate. As for the scattershot accusations of ‘racism, transphobia, or homophobia’, this is all starting to feel a little dated. Don’t these students realise that very few are persuaded by these smears anymore?
The Bangor Debating Society was founded in 1849, but until now it has never claimed a mandate to act in loco parentis for all staff and students and protect them from ‘harmful’ ideas. Some members of the university will doubtless be voting for Reform in future elections. They are unlikely to appreciate this small group of pompous martinets making decisions on their behalf. Perhaps the Debating and Political Society at Bangor University would be better served by a leadership that understands the concept of the marketplace of ideas. This being central to – well, you know – debate and politics.
It is troubling to reflect on how today’s threats to freedom in higher education are largely originating from within the campus walls. As Greg Lukianoff has argued, ‘people all over the globe are coming to expect emotional and intellectual comfort as though it were a right. This is precisely what you would expect when you train a generation to believe that they have a right not to be offended. Eventually, they stop demanding freedom of speech and start demanding freedom from speech’.
It is this mentality which led to the sign spotted at Colorado State University in January 2022 which read: ‘If you (or someone you know) are affected by a free speech event on campus, here are some resources…’ These included hotlines to report free speech advocates so that they might be investigated.
This kind of intolerance is one legacy of the ‘No Platforming’ policy initiated by the National Union of Students (NUS) back in April 1974. Even at the time, critics expressed concern that the practice might eventually expand to include any speech that students found personally objectionable. The activist leadership of the Debating Society at Bangor are the living proof of such concept creep.
All of this is reflective of a broader trend across the western world. The 2026 College Free Speech Rankings by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) have revealed that ‘students continue to show low tolerance for controversial speakers, and troublingly, more believe it’s acceptable to shout down a speaker, block access to events, or even resort to violence to silence campus speech than ever before’. The trend shows no sign of reversing, since such attitudes have ‘either held steady or worsened in the past year’.
A debating society that cannot tolerate debate is abandoning its very reason to exist. We have reached the point where those students who are genuinely interested in having their views challenged will have to struggle against their authoritarian peers. Judging from the antics of the Debating Society at Bangor, they will have quite a fight on their hands.
This article (The debating society that refuses to debate) was created and published by Andrew Doyle and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply