The University of Sydney has proposed 5 new policies that will affect all students. Students and University community have until Thursday 13 February 2025 to respond.
We believe that these new policies represent a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus.
So what’s the problem?
The University claims that the aim of these policies is to keep staff and students safe. SUPRA believes all students and staff have a right to feel safe on campus. However, the University’s proposed policies are too restrictive and will silence our robust tradition of debate, activism, and academic freedom. Many of the policies seem to be lacking in evidence to support them. If implemented, these policies will change our campus life forever.
These policies were announced in the wake of the Gaza Solidarity Encampment and other pro-Palestine activism on university campuses around the world. We do not accept that the Gaza Solidarity Encampment represented a genuine psychosocial safety hazard for any individual or group. When racism or other forms of abuse occur at the University, these are dealt with through existing policies such as the Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination Prevention Policy, the Student Charter, and the Staff and Affiliates Code of Conduct.
SUPRA believes that the real threats to student health and safety are the housing crisis, the exorbitant cost of living, and soaring student fees. We understand that students report being profoundly impacted by violence and oppression on this continent and around the world. However, we also understand that students generally find that engaging in political and social activism can be a useful outlet for this distress.
Poor student consultation
The timing of these policy changes and consultation period is also deeply concerning. The announcement and consultation period happened while most students were on summer break. We do not believe the University has allowed enough time for good-faith consultation of students on these policies – which will directly impact so many of us. This is not genuine consultation. We ask the University to extend the consultation period, to allow genuine student consultation.
Don’t have time to read all the policies and respond to the University?
Let the University know that their consultation was inadequate. Use the links below to comment on each policy.
Sample response:
I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
Acceptable Use of ICT Resources Policy
The proposed Acceptable Use of ICT Resources Policy (PDF 914KB) widens the scope of the University to discipline staff or students for any use of technology that ‘occurs during, or in connection to, any event run by or affiliated with student representative organisations, student clubs, or student societies’ (whether sanctioned by the University or not). This could include social media posts promoting events, videos, reels or tiles about events held on campus, or emails sent to members of clubs, societies or student representative organisations.
Under the policy, this communication could be subject to University discipline if it includes prohibited material. ‘Prohibited material’ includes ‘materials that promote terrorism’. Terrorism is not defined in the policy. As a political category with an ever-changing definition, this term can be subject to the political interpretation of whoever is enforcing the policy. A term like ‘hate speech’, by contrast, is clear language with settled meanings that would protect student safety and prevent racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, antisemitism and Islamophobia.
Our concern is that students who are members of clubs, societies, colleges, or student representative organisations who use University ICT resources (emails, University computers, ICT networks) to communicate with each other and other students, would potentially have to take extreme care to scrub their online communication – and that this infringes significantly on students’ freedom of speech.
Provide feedback on the proposed Acceptable Use of ICT Resources Policy.
Deadline to respond: Thursday 13 February 2025. Responses are anonymous.
Sample response:
Firstly, I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
I feel very concerned about the impact of this policy on students. I believe this policy presents a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus. Specifically, I have the following concerns:
- Students who are members of clubs, societies or student representative organisations that utilise University ICT resources to communicate with other students, will have to take extreme care to scrub our online communication—imposing significantly on our freedom of speech.
- ‘Prohibited material’ includes ‘materials that promote terrorism’. However, ‘terrorism’ has not been defined in the policy, and, as an ever-changing political category, is therefore subject to the political interpretations of whoever is enforcing the policy.
- Existing policies are effective in protecting students from forms of discrimination on campus, including the Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination Prevention Policy, the Student Charter, and the Staff and Affiliates Code of Conduct.
Email and Electronic Messaging Policy
The proposed Email and Electronic Messaging Policy (PDF 825KB) states that students and staff should refrain from sending bulk emails about ‘special interest topics’ such as political, social, or recreational topics.
Even this very email could be banned under the policy, depending on whether the University deemed you have appropriate expressed interest in receiving an email about this topic. We are concerned that uses of ICT resources that the University simply doesn’t like or agree with may be subject to repression and disciplinary action under this policy.
Provide feedback on the proposed Email and Electronic Messaging Policy.
Deadline to respond: Thursday 13 February 2025. Responses are anonymous.
Sample response:
Firstly, I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
I feel very concerned about the impact of this policy on students. Broadly, I believe this policy presents a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus. The policy states that students and staff should refrain from sending bulk emails about ‘special interest topics’ such as political, social, or recreational topics. I am concerned that use of ICT resources that the University simply doesn’t like or agree with may be subject to repression and disciplinary action under this policy.
Flag Policy
The proposed Flag Policy (PDF 733KB) states that flags cannot be displayed in indoor shared spaces, must not contravene any University policy, must not be offensive or inappropriate, cannot cause physical safety risk, cannot ‘restrict light in buildings’ and cannot imply University support for any cause. This means that students and staff can fly certain flags for a short time outdoors (the policy specifies sports teams), but any display of any flag will be subject to considerable control by the University.
Displays of the Palestinian flag at the recent encampment, for example, would be prohibited. This policy makes any staff member or student who hangs or displays a flag vulnerable to complaint or even discipline by the University.
Provide feedback on the proposed Flag Policy.
Deadline to respond: Thursday 13 February 2025. Responses are anonymous.
Sample response:
Firstly, I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
I feel very concerned about the impact of this policy on students. I believe this policy presents a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus.
Specifically, I have the following concerns:
- The policy allows the University considerable control over the display of any flag.
- The policy restricts students from displaying flags that ‘might reasonably be seen as implying University support for the flag’s subject matter’ – potentially restricting the display of flags entirely.
- The policy heavily restricts students’ rights to expression – only allowing students to display flags on University land for a short time, if they are deemed ‘appropriate’.
- The policy allows the University broad discretion to determine what flags might contain ‘any offensive or inappropriate wording or images’.
- The policy makes any student who hangs or displays a flag vulnerable to complaint or even discipline by the University.
Promotional and Display Materials Policy
The proposed Promotional and Display Materials Policy (PDF 765KB) will require any notice posted anywhere at the University of Sydney to have contact details for the organisation or person authorising the materials.
The policy gives the University the power to take down any notices they feel constitute ‘psychosocial safety hazards’. It is not clear what criteria the University will use to make these determinations, or what training or qualification workers will have to do so. This puts virtually any notice with political or social content at risk of being torn down by campus security.
Additionally, student organisations may be made financially liable for removal costs associated with materials posted in locations other than University-approved notice boards. Given the fact that University notice boards are now extremely scarce, having mostly been removed, this exposes student organisations to financial risk while limiting their ability to communicate with the community.
The policy also explicitly prohibits the dropping of banners from the City Rd and Parramatta Rd footbridges, and prohibits the temporary projection of words or images on to any University building without prior approval.
Provide feedback on the proposed Promotional and Display Materials Policy.
Deadline to respond: Thursday 13 February 2025. Responses are anonymous.
Sample response:
Firstly, I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
I feel very concerned about the impact of this policy on students. I believe this policy presents a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus.
Specifically, I have the following concerns:
- The policy infringes on students right to protest – explicitly prohibiting the dropping of banners from the City Rd and Parramatta Rd footbridges and the temporary projection of words or images on to any University building without prior approval.
- The policy places administrative burden on students to seek approval for activities related to protest and general communication to the student body.
- The policy gives the University the power to take down any notices that are determined to constitute a ‘psychosocial safety hazard’. It is not clear what criteria the University will use to make these determinations, or what training or qualification workers will have to do so. This puts virtually any notice with political or social content at risk of being torn down by campus security.
- Student organisations may be made financially liable for removal costs associated with materials posted in locations other than University-approved notice boards. Given that University noticeboards have been continuously removed in recent years, this exposes student organisations to financial risk while limiting their ability to communicate with the community.
Social Media and Public Comment Policy
The proposed Social Media and Public Comment Policy (PDF 858KB) will apply to all students and staff when engaging in public discussion (including on social media) from University wi-fi or from a University device. Additionally, the policy may apply to any post or comment if there is even an implied connection to the University. SUPRA is concerned that an implied connection might be as little as having Usyd in your social media profile, or making a comment like, ‘I’m a student at Usyd and I believe … ‘.
The policy is concerning because it brings all manner of speech under the direct provision of University policy. The policy states that University community members must not make any comments that are deemed by the University to ‘risk any person’s health or safety’, including ‘risks relating to psychosocial hazards from exposure to traumatic materials or events, [and] frequent conflict …’. This language is so broad that it may include normal parts of rigorous academic debate, and the discussion of actually occurring traumatic events such as genocide, war, or military occupation.
The policy also prohibits students from making announcements before lectures or tutorials. Such announcements have previously been a cornerstone of political organising on campus, as well as part of the election campaign cycle for student representative organisations. This move is a clear clamp-down on students’ freedom of expression.
Provide feedback on the proposed Social Media and Public Comment Policy.
Deadline to respond: Thursday 13 February 2025. Responses are anonymous.
Sample response:
Firstly, I am deeply concerned that the University has not provided students with adequate time to provide feedback on this policy, that will directly impact so many of us. Given most students are on break for the entire consultation period, I request that the University extends the consultation period, allowing us to provide thorough, meaningful and informed feedback on this policy.
I feel very concerned about the impact of this policy on students. I believe this policy presents a very real threat to academic, political and social freedom on campus. The policy heavily restricts students’ freedom of expression in a number of ways:
- The policy makes any student who posts with an implied connection to the University, vulnerable to complaint or even discipline by the University.
- The policy prohibits students from making announcements before lectures or tutorials. Such announcements have previously been a cornerstone of political organising on campus, as well as part of the election campaign cycle for student representative organisations.
- The policy states that University community members must not make any comments that are deemed by the University to ‘risk any person’s health or safety’, including ‘risks relating to psychosocial hazards from exposure to traumatic materials or events, [and] frequent conflict.’ By adopting such broad language, the policy may restrict normal parts of rigorous academic debate, and the discussion of topics such as genocide, war, or military occupation.
Responses from the University community
In November 2024, the Health and Safety Representatives from Student Administration Services and Central Operations Services, Vinil Kumar and Jennifer Huch, published a statement calling on the University to abandon these policies. They highlighted that none of the proposed changes actually correspond with Workplace Health and Safety regulations. The University’s engagement in widespread wage theft, and the proliferation of insecure work, are well-documented threats to workers’ psychosocial safety, and Kumar and Huch suggested that the University start by dealing with these matters.
The NTEU’s response
The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), which represents many University workers, including casual teaching and research staff, told University management that:
1. The timing (early in the academic year, and the short time frame for response) does not align with the stated policy of the University of Sydney on consultation ensuring staff have a reasonable opportunity to contribute on matters relating to safety.
2. The policies may include elements that threaten both political (freedom of speech and association) and industrial (union communication and organising) rights.
3. They are not clearly evidence-based, or the evidence basis for some of the elements is not provided.
4. They are based on organisational rationales that have not been included in their release.
The NTEU will be making a submission on these policies, so any NTEU member can forward any comments about the policies to sydney.president@nteu.org.au.
The NTEU also recommends that ‘members who are interested in the implications of these proposals are encouraged to make a submission, including any concerns you might have about the consultation process. Members unable to make an informed submission because of time constraints are encouraged to submit feedback simply stating that concern’.
Stay in touch with us