The internet adage “pics or it didn’t happen” refers to the fact that, since about 2010, almost nothing important has happened in a public space without someone pulling out their phone and taking a photo or video of it. 
And yet, if we are to believe a SafeWork NSW report, details of which were published by the Australian, pro-Palestine activists at Sydney University managed to burst into lecture halls chanting antisemitic slogans and carrying banners that read “Jews not allowed”, without a single photo or video of these alleged incidents in existence. 
Similarly, no-one thought to snap a pic and post about the time when, according to the report, Sydney University student activists “put up a billboard with all the names of Hamas terrorists on it” at a protest.
The report also claims that the eight-week Gaza solidarity encampment, which began last May, created “a workplace of fear, anxiousness and a fear of retribution towards Jewish workers and students because they were Jewish people”. Multiple reports and investigations into the encampment, including this one, have failed to provide any evidence of this. But if you repeat something often enough, it can start to seem true. 
The SafeWork NSW report is the result of an investigation instigated by a complaint from 23 staff and students claiming that Sydney University had breached its responsibility to provide a safe working environment for Jewish employees. SafeWork, the government agency tasked with regulating workplace health and safety, concluded based on interviews with the complainants and two site visits that the university “failed to take reasonable actions to manage, reduce, and eliminate active antisemitic conduct on campus”. 
But the report contains no credible evidence of antisemitic activism linked to the Palestine solidarity campaign. The main examples from the report, which the media have used to try to slander pro-Palestine activists at Sydney University, fail to provide this. Some are clearly fabricated, as in the above examples, which have not been corroborated with any evidence. Others are stock standard features of the campaign to support Palestine: posters and flyers advertising rallies and campus meetings, “Gaza will be free” tagged in the campus graffiti tunnel and the slogan “Palestine will be free” being chanted at a campus protest. There is not a shred of antisemitism in any of this.
That these gestures of staff and student support for the Palestinians form the basis for “psychosocial harm” to employees at Sydney University is a politically charged false assertion. 
In putting together this report, SafeWork makes a mockery of the idea of workplace health and safety. This is perhaps unsurprising, given that the agency is known for taking a soft touch approach to bosses who endanger their employees’ lives at work. In 2022, SafeWork NSW was <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/workplace-safety-scandal-auditor-general-launches-six-month-investigation-into-failings-20221013-p5bphh.html">investigated</a> over allegations that workers had experienced injury and even death on sites where inspectors failed to follow up complaints adequately due to political interference.
While serious infringements of workplace health and safety have gone unpunished, and the number of workers fatally injured at work continues to <a href="https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/media-centre/news/key-work-health-and-safety-statistics-2024">rise</a>, the government agency tasked with regulating this is instead being misused as a weapon to come after pro-Palestine activism on university campuses. 
On this front, SafeWork is only following the lead of many other institutions that have tried to stifle Palestine solidarity under the guise of combating antisemitism. 
State Labor Premier Chris Minns spent months linking a “<a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/the-great-antisemitism-con-job">great tsunami of high-profile antisemitic attacks</a>“ to weekly pro-Palestine street marches in Sydney, passing repressive anti-protest laws on the back of these claims. The NSW Police later revealed that these incidents had been almost entirely the work of petty criminals, linked to the same common source as the Dural caravan hoax. 
Universities have also used “concern for antisemitism” as justification to introduce anti-protest policies and procedures. Indeed, despite what the SafeWork report alleges, Sydney University has been leading the charge on quashing pro-Palestine activism. Over the last year, Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott has pushed through multiple policies designed to crack down on student and staff rights to protest and express political dissent. The new <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/free-speech-under-attack-at-sydney-university">Campus Access Policy</a> bans forms of protest that have been part of university life since the campaign against the Vietnam War, while policies introduced just this month impose punitive rules regarding posters on campus and total bans on students making lecture announcements before their classes. 
As Israel intensifies the genocide in Gaza and the war crimes pile up, the pro-Israel camp continues to find new ways to slander and silence the activists standing up for justice. But we won’t stop campaigning for Palestine.
Shovan Bhattarai is the vice-president of the University of Sydney Students’ Representative Council and a coordinator of the campus Students for Palestine collective

Shovan Bhattarai

SafeWork NSW’s report on antisemitism at Sydney University is fake news

The University of Melbourne has expelled two student activists and indefinitely suspended two more for a 2024 occupation of the office of university academic and pro-Israel campaigner Steven Prawer. The expulsions follow a pattern of management attacks on Palestine solidarity activism. 
Since 3 March, the administration has banned indoor protests, those at building entrances and any that are “unreasonably disruptive”. The university previously tried to intimidate nineteen students by issuing misconduct notices after the Gaza Solidarity Encampment last year. When students camped out in the Arts West building to demand divestment from Israel and arms manufacturers, the university secretly spied on their movements via the Wi-Fi system. 
Management also threatened to defund the student union if it paid Palestinian speakers at a forum raising awareness about conditions in the West Bank. As well, in 2022, the university condemned the union for adopting a pro-Palestine and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions position. 
To legitimise its crackdown on campus free speech and activism, the administration has cynically weaponised the issue of antisemitism. In 2023, the university adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s definition of antisemitism. The definition is hotly contested because it includes, as an example of antisemitism, “criticism of the state of Israel”. 
Like the government and media, the university deliberately conflates support for Palestine and an end to the war in Gaza with hatred of Jewish people. There are several anti-Zionist Jewish organisations, such as Jewish Voice for Peace in the United States, that vocally oppose Israel’s war in Gaza. Indeed, JVP’s slogan at demonstrations is “not in our name”; a pointed rejection of the idea that Israel acts in the interests of Jewish people when it starves and massacres Palestinians. 
Recently, the university published an “Anti-Racism Action Plan”, supposedly to combat antisemitism on campus. Twelve complaints of antisemitism were lodged with the university, it says, “concentrated in Semester 1 2024 ... during the period of the encampment and occupation [and] largely related to posters, slogans and stickers which could not be attributed to a specific person”. 
The only evidence provided of antisemitism is pro-Palestine slogans and protests calling for an end to the war in Gaza. Under the guise of fighting racism, the university has punitively targeted anti-war and anti-genocide student campaigners. 
Universities are attacking freedom of speech and anti-war protesters in part because they are a key pillar of defence research in Australia. The University of Melbourne alone collaborates with thirteen weapons companies, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing and BAE Systems. 
It aims to cement its place in weapons research by establishing a <a href="https://www.thecitizen.org.au/articles/at-fishermans-bend-university-of-melbourne-angling-for-defence-contracts-relationships">weapons research hub at the new Fisherman’s Bend campu</a>s, currently under construction in Port Melbourne. The university will partner with Boeing, Siemens, and the Australian Department of Defence. The administration has already spent $2 billion on the project and is attempting to establish more contracts with other weapons companies. 
The decision to discipline students coincides with the devastating escalation in Israel’s war. Israel is systematically starving Gazans. In the past week, a US “aid” organisation, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, has repeatedly gunned down Palestinians desperately seeking food at distribution sites. Israeli politicians boast openly of making the Gaza Strip so unliveable that Palestinians will “voluntarily” leave. It’s open ethnic cleansing. And at this moment, the university administration has come out stridently on Israel’s side. 
The expulsions set a dangerous precedent for free speech and the right to protest on campus. But they can be challenged. Last year, <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/how-deakin-university-tried-to-trample-on-students-rights-and-failed">a Deakin student was suspended</a> for her involvement in the Deakin Gaza Encampment, but was reinstated on appeal. Similarly, <a href="https://honisoit.com/2024/09/pro-palestinian-anu-student-wins-expulsion-appeal/">an ANU student won their expulsion appeal</a> after being disciplined. Those cases show that it’s possible to challenge university discipline and win civil liberties on campuses. The movement won’t be cowed or intimidated by those trying to silence us.

Emma Dynes

Melbourne University expels Palestine solidarity activists

Reconciliation Day in Canberra last year was ice cold, the air thick with fog. For 232 days, Israel had been indiscriminately bombing the people of Gaza. For 28 days, hundreds of students and staff had maintained a protest encampment on Kambri lawns, the heart of the Australian National University campus, demanding that the administration cut ties with Israel and condemn the genocide. ANU managers had spent the month slandering the protest and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-16/act-palestine-anu-gaza-encampment-members-ordered-to-vacate/103858184">suspending student activists</a> involved in the encampment. 
It was Monday morning, 27 May; the university bosses finally decided that they could no longer tolerate the encampment in such a prominent position. Their official justification was that we were blocking a fire evacuation point, and the backup evacuation point just would not do. In truth, they wanted the protest out of sight. 
Dozens of security guards and a handful of police officers arrived to serve the students with an evacuation notice. Those awakened by this order initially complied. Ambushed and outnumbered at 7am, they began dismantling the tents. The media soon arrived to witness the supervised self-destruction. 
Yet, as the morning fog cleared and the sun came out, a handful of students sat down in defiance and began chanting: “Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest!” More spontaneously joined, sitting around the camping gear, which had now been packed down, linking arms and chanting. The circle of hi-vis security guards retreated as supporters surged closer to the first movers and joined in the chanting. 
More police arrived. Blue and white chequered vans, cars and motorbikes pulled up across the creek to establish a “command centre” about a hundred metres away. Security was no longer fit for the task, so ANU had called in the cavalry. 
Meanwhile, the students had now convened a meeting. Did we want to stare down the police, risking arrest, to defend the camp? After a brief discussion, we took a vote. The decision was close to unanimous—we would not move. 
Some volunteers sifted through the crowd to write the phone number of a supportive lawyer on the arms of everyone willing to get arrested. Those who preferred not to face arrest stepped off the grass and formed a human chain around the camp. About a hundred sat ready to be dragged off in a divvy van, and a few hundred more stood with their arms linked in an unbroken chain around the perimeter. People with megaphones were stationed throughout the picket line, leading songs and chants to keep spirits high. 
We shall not, we shall not be moved
We shall not, we shall not be moved
Just like a tree that’s planted by the water
We shall not be moved.
But after several hours, the ultimatum finally came. Two of us were given the job of police liaisons. We walked to their “command centre” next to the creek and were told that the university was prepared to offer a second location for the camp, a few hundred metres up the path. If we refused to move there by 3pm, we would be arrested. We went back to the camp and relayed what the officer had said. We took another vote. “Knowing what we just told you, who is committed to staying?” Everyone cheered. I passed their message back to the officer. 
The deadline came and went. We kept checking our watches. Eventually, at 4pm or so, an officer marched to a spot across from the camp and placed a small speaker on the ground to announce an official directive: that everyone must vacate Kambri lawns by 11am Tuesday or face arrest. 
We had forced the police to back down—for now. Every cop van, car and bike left the campus, and we were left to debrief. We fought the law and, for a moment, we won. 
Later, we heard that the university had issued a directive to all students to avoid the Kambri precinct the following day, and that businesses in the precinct were instructed to shut down in preparation for a major police operation. But we also heard from some unionists that workers on ANU construction sites were organising to walk off the job in solidarity with us. 
We put a call out to every community group we could think of to mobilise the next day and support us against mass arrests. The university managers were preparing to escalate the situation—but we had won once, and the mood was that we could win again. 
Yet, after hours of debate, several votes and a thinning out of people in the camp, the scared and tired few who remained at around midnight finally voted to accept the university’s directive. The anticipated showdown never came. Construction workers still walked off the job. Students, community members and reporters still showed up the next day in expectation. But the police didn’t need to return—they scored their victory through intimidation. 
This wasn’t the end, however. The camp continued in its new location for 83 more days. By the end of the year, there had been several general meetings, countless rallies, a referendum and one of the longest campus protest encampments in the country—all demanding divestment from Israel and weapons companies supplying the Israeli military. 
Under pressure, the university reversed the suspensions and expulsions of student activists and <a href="https://www.woroni.com.au/news/anu-to-divest-from-controversial-weapons-manufacturers-but-questions-remain/">promised to divest</a> from “controversial weapons companies”. Exactly which companies were “controversial” was never clarified, and no updates have been provided since that promise was made. They have not yet condemned the genocide in Gaza or cut ties with Israel.
The fight for a free Palestine continues, but the strength of our side is nourished by small acts of defiance and partial victories like the one we scored last year on Kambri lawns.

Nick Reich

When Palestine solidarity protesters defied police at the ANU

To stifle growing pro-Palestinian activities on Australian campuses, university authorities are developing and applying disparate techniques of control. Consequently, the university as a place of free speech, political activism and the right to protest is under attack.
The universities of<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/jan/21/university-of-sydney-criticised-for-plan-to-ban-protest-banners-being-displayed-without-prior-permission"> Sydney</a>,<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/jun/03/university-of-melbourne-two-students-expelled-pro-palestine-protest-ntwnfb?utm_term=683e574093202591af7057f2c5ad560f&amp;utm_campaign=GuardianTodayAUS&amp;utm_source=esp&amp;utm_medium=Email&amp;CMP=GTAU_email"> Melbourne</a> and<a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/university-of-wa-bans-statements-that-cause-harm-disciplines-student-for-defending-free-speech"> Western Australia</a> are particularly punitive. The intricate intrusiveness and hyper-vigilance of their techniques of control are well known and widely criticised. 
All these techniques have been identified by members of Educational Researchers for Palestine—a group I belong to. Such patterns are evident in the views and material we have gathered from universities and from our own experiences, observations and communications with other staff and students. While the following techniques are not equally evident in all universities, various combinations are evident in many.
1. Control through double-speak
Universities claim to uphold free speech and academic freedom. But on matters related to Israel/Palestine they shut both down. They also claim to balance free speech with their anti-racism agendas. But these agendas are selective. Antisemitism is their focus. Anti-Palestinian racism, including their own, is not. Anti-<a href="https://apan.org.au/media_release/apan-aman-report/">Palestinian</a> racism involves “actions that silence, exclude, erase, stereotype, defame, or dehumanise Palestinians and their narratives”. 
They say they balance free speech with ensuring a safe environment. But their main concern is the political backlash associated with purported complaints about the safety of Jewish students and staff. In contrast, the university itself creates an unsafe environment for Palestinian staff, students and their allies including their Jewish allies. 
2. Control through distraction
By focusing on antisemitism, universities distract attention from anti-Palestinian racism on campus and from Israel’s dreadful treatment of the Palestinian people. This distraction involves endless debates about what constitutes antisemitism. And universities’ ambiguous definitions of antisemitism allow them flexibility in classifying hateful and threatening speech. 
In February 2025, Universities Australia released its highly ambiguous “working definition of<a href="https://universitiesaustralia.edu.au/media-item/statement-on-racism/"> antisemitism</a>”. This was endorsed by all 39 members. How individual universities will embed their endorsement is not yet clear but further distraction is guaranteed. 
3. Spatial control
Restrictions are placed on the spaces where Palestinian supporters might gather to prepare banners and posters, distribute materials and hold events. Students are not allowed to announce events in classrooms or lecture theatres, to leave fliers on desks or posters on walls. These who don’t “belong” to the university are prohibited from involvement in protests on university grounds and threatened with trespass. 
4. Language and image control
The campus is to be cleansed of posters, fliers, flags, chalked messages. Almost any image, phrase or slogan may be deemed antisemitic. Hence, all images of Palestine or messages of Palestine advocacy or solidarity can be defined as contravening university rules. 
5. Political control
Student and staff activities relating to Palestine are strongly discouraged—clubs, film screenings, speakers’ forums, petitioning, distributing leaflets, chalking—even fundraising. University approval can be sought but such approval is largely a delaying and censorship ploy involving microscopic bureaucratic hurdles. 
Some academic staff are expected to become agents of the university’s political control in their classrooms. They must ensure that nothing is said or seen that is unrelated to their immediate teaching topic. 
When linked to Palestine/Israel, certain research, teaching and learning are considered dangerous—justice and ethics, human rights, international law, settler colonialism, apartheid, imperialism and the history and geopolitics of the Middle East. Those pursuing such “dangerous knowledge” may feel the need to water down their curriculum and research. 
6. Technological surveillance
In some cases, if they are to use a university account, staff and students must agree to being monitored. Whether they agree or not, technology is used to monitor pro-Palestinian activities, to identify “ring leaders” and participants. Pro-Palestinian activists may also have their technology use restricted, thus making it difficult to share information. Certainly, over time, universities have increased their surveillance of all staff and students—usually with little or no follow-up. However, their surveillance and follow-up have intensified in response to pro-Palestinian activism.
7. Discipline and punishment
Students and staff are subjected to various forms. Their self-defence is time-consuming, costly and emotionally draining. 
Peaceful events are often redefined as potentially threatening and violent. Hence security staff and police are used to “keep the peace” and to identify and report “leaders” and “troublemakers”. They have been used to shut down encampments and protests. At encampments, they have not protected students from violent attacks by extreme right-wing groups. Their presence is implicitly threatening, and their behaviour is sometimes physically violent. 
Undergraduate and graduate students have been “spoken to”, warned, suspended, fined and expelled. Staff have also been “spoken to” and warned, had their teaching and other activities monitored and reported by pro-Israeli/Zionist students and other staff. They have had their research questioned and some have had their grants suspended. 
8. Climate control
A climate of fear and distrust is created. It has a chilling effect on everyday university activities and relationships. Fear causes self-censorship. Events are relocated or re-badged. 
Staff feel their opportunities for jobs, tenure, promotion and academic leave are at risk. Students feel at risk of suspension and expulsion. They often don’t know if their peers, lecturers or supervisors will support or report them. Palestinian, Muslim and Arab staff feel extra visible and vulnerable. 
The result: universities of bad faith and ethical emptiness.
They have allowed themselves to be intimidated by politicians and special interest groups. They have tried to bury the discussion of an inexcusable tragedy involving genocide. They have sacrificed the notion that knowledge must be free and fearless—corrupting truth and undermining trust and collegiality. Timid and small-minded, they implicitly encourage staff and students to be the same. 
Were they not so ethically empty, universities could have practised an ethic of care, courage and compassion in response to the ongoing horrors visited by Israel on Gaza and the West Bank. They could have developed this into a sector-wide ethos. They could have responded to the desperate <a href="https://www.gazauniversities.org/">calls</a> for help from universities in Gaza. They could have explored, with staff and students, ways to help Gaza recover from the educational obliteration of <a href="https://euppublishingblog.com/2025/05/27/scholasticide-memory-power-of-pedagogy/">scholasticide</a>. They could have mobilised their knowledge and expertise to contribute to an understanding of the issues and to consider how university members might help alleviate the Palestinian people’s terrible suffering. 
Could have? Should have.
First published by the <a href="https://blog.aare.edu.au/these-are-deeply-disturbing-patterns-of-censorship-across-australian-universities/?jetpack_skip_subscription_popup">Australian Association for Research in Education</a>. Jane Kenway is an elected fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, Australia, emeritus professor at Monash University and professorial fellow at the University of Melbourne.

Jane Kenway

The patterns of censorship across Australian universities

The most authoritarian campus in the country looks quite nice. The University of Western Australia, situated at the edge of the Swan River in Perth, features Japanese, sunken and Shakespeare gardens, peacocks that strut through the tropical grove, and Romanesque sandstone buildings. 
Yet, far from an idyllic haven of critical inquiry and free debate, UWA managers are turning the place into a sort of Trumpian protectorate. They are imposing a suite of bans and restrictions that undermine progressive activism and free speech on campus—even banning some factual statements—while riding roughshod over clubs and societies in the process. 
The initial rules were announced before first semester began. On 12 February, the student guild and the university sent a joint letter to the Students for Palestine and Socialist Alternative clubs, announcing that putting up posters, handing out leaflets, using chalk on pavements and hanging banners were banned almost everywhere on campus. <a href="https://www.uwa.edu.au/about/leadership-and-governance/integrity-and-standards/conduct-and-integrity#:~:text=In%20doing%20so%2C%20the%20University,the%20Director%20of%20Student%20Life.">Lecture announcements were also forbidden</a>, with a few minor exceptions. 
Many rules were already on the books; the novelty is the move to enforce them. By doing so, university managers outlawed activities fundamental to political activism in one fell swoop. Students have engaged in these activities to promote support for the plebiscite on marriage equality, campaign for a Yes vote in the Voice to Parliament referendum and promote student climate strikes. 
Like any Trump-style offensive, the attack was sweeping and resulted in much collateral damage: the university inadvertently imposed severe restrictions on other clubs and societies that rely on posters, leaflets and lecture announcements to promote their events. 
New rules were also imposed on Students for Palestine and Socialist Alternative clubs. The university informed us that events need approval not just from the student guild but also from campus security and a senior university manager. Applications to hold events must be submitted with at least ten working days’ notice and must include a list of “measures that will be taken to ensure the safety of others” (political discussions now being treated like some fire-throwing festival). 
Ominously, the letters warned that clubs must “refrain from using phrases and slogans that are contrary to the university’s policies”. The university did not initially clarify what specific “phrases and slogans” were questionable. It soon became clear, however, that this was a measure to censor Palestine solidarity speech on campus. 
Students for Palestine organised an event on 19 March, at which activists were going to paint “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” on a banner. The university sent me an email the day before, warning that the slogan was “not a permitted use on UWA Lands”. I didn’t immediately see or respond to the email. So, in a move indicative of the censorious campus atmosphere, the head of security was directed to track me down on campus and deliver a printed copy of the email. The penalty for the banner painting was extreme: the university said that proceeding with it would result in “possible disciplinary proceedings and/or disaffiliation”. 
So while Israel carries out genocide in Gaza, and amid threats of imminent ethnic cleansing and forced displacement coming from far-right Israeli politicians, calling for justice and equal rights for all residents of historic Palestine gets you disciplined, or your club disaffiliated, at UWA. 
At UWA, facts are no defence from discipline. In follow-up correspondence, I inquired about the university’s attitude to the statements “Israel is an apartheid state” and “Israel is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza”. Lisa Goldacre, director of student life and a senior manager, replied that the “use of these slogans even if objectively true, may still cause harm to others”, and, “if your club makes a particular statement (e.g. in an article, flyer, speech, banner, online post, etc, etc), then the fact that statement may be objectively true does not mean that your club’s use of that statement will not breach UWA Policy”. 
Again, it’s not just the Students for Palestine and Socialist Alternative clubs that are affected. Anyone who organises an event that crosses UWA’s red lines is a target. Palestine is one such red line. 
For example, in May last year, the Muslim Students Association was <a href="https://www.instagram.com/uwamsa/p/C6v3QUwP0dT/?locale=ru&amp;hl=am-et">forced to cancel an event featuring influential speaker Sami Hamdi</a> after the administration refused to approve their room booking. UWA disapproved of the speaker. Similarly, the Palestinian Cultural Society was <a href="https://perthvoiceinteractive.com/2024/10/24/students-claim-uwa-tried-to-block-speaker/">forced to cancel an event</a> featuring renowned author Vijay Prashad after UWA rescheduled their booking to a time that clashed with another of Prashad’s speaking events. 
These attacks are not limited to crackdowns on pro-Palestine speech and activists. They open the door to attacks on free speech in general. 
This was demonstrated at the end of March, when UWA disciplined a student for putting up posters related to freedom of speech. Finn Penter put up half a dozen posters at a monthly meeting of clubs and societies. The posters read: “Free speech is under attack” and “Clubs are under attack.” Penter is an elected student representative on the guild council and a member of the Socialist Alternative club. The university initiated disciplinary action against him for putting up the posters and used CCTV to monitor him. Shockingly, Penter was issued an official reprimand from the university for misconduct.
“No wonder students feel like we’re studying in an Orwellian surveillance state”, Penter said. “There are all these attacks against free speech, and if you speak up about it by, for example, putting up a poster, you get punished. This is extreme overreach, and it shows how insistent UWA is to put an end to activism on campus”. 
These attacks come as the Trump administration cracks down on Palestine solidarity activists in the US. Some have faced <a href="https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2025/04/16/protesters-denounce-abduction-of-another-palestinian-student-activist-by-us-immigration/">abduction</a>, threats of <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/us-government-kidnaps-palestinian-student-activist">deportation</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/07/nyregion/columbia-protest-library-occupied.html">arrest</a>. Republican House Majority leader Steve Scalise has spoken about <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/18/trump-education-policies">stripping universities of their accreditation</a> if there have been Palestine solidarity protests on their campuses. Columbia University has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/article/trump-university-college.html">strengthened its campus security and anti-protest restrictions</a>, among other regressive anti-DEI changes, after the Trump administration cut $400 million in its funding. This is an intensified continuation of the crackdown that started last year. 
The attacks on student activism in the US are much more extreme than anything in Australia. But there is a goal that the managers’ offensive at UWA and the Trumpian crackdown on American universities have in common: eradicate progressive activism on campuses. And use a heavy stick to discipline anyone who does not comply.

Alevine Magila

University of WA bans statements that ‘cause harm’, disciplines student for defending free speech

At the end of 2024, the Australian National University announced $250 million in cuts as part of a “Renew ANU” program. According to figures published in the Australian Financial Review, this “renewal” includes $150 million slashed from salaries—the equivalent of 638 full-time jobs.
While hundreds of workers are facing the sack, it has since been revealed that new Vice-Chancellor Genevieve Bell was still taking an undisclosed salary from tech giant Intel well into her first year at ANU—on top of her $1.1 million university pay packet. Also, Canberra MP David Pocock revealed that Bell blew $1.2 million on external consultants to advise on Renew ANU after telling the Senate the university had spent just $50,000.
The fallout has been significant. In an unprecedented move, 800 ANU staff participated in a National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) vote of no confidence in Bell and Chancellor Julie Bishop. An overwhelming 95 percent voted in favour of the no-confidence motion. Bell’s response? To smear the vote as “sexist”.
It’s not just staff pushing back. Students have launched a “No Cuts at ANU” campaign linking staff working conditions to student learning conditions. Forums, rallies and a student strike have been held throughout the first half of 2025. The demands are simple: sack Bell and Bishop, get rid of the Renew ANU project and publicly disclose the university’s financial records.
Bell is one of many university bosses overseeing a national offensive against staff and students. At the University of Canberra, ex-Labor parliamentarian turned Vice-Chancellor Bill Shorten has ditched any pretence of supporting workers by axing 150 staff. Western Sydney University is gutting 400 jobs. The University of Wollongong has cut more than 100 subjects and slashed $21 million from salaries. Monash University is cramming more students into bigger tutorials while slashing staff numbers.
These attacks result from a system that treats education as a business and students and staff as cogs in the machine. With the Albanese government cutting funding and capping international student numbers, universities expect greater uncertainty in their profit margins and are making workers and students pay.
A fightback is underway at the ANU, but it is only the beginning. To defend our education, we need to take on not just vice-chancellors like Bell and Shorten, but the whole rotten system that treats our education like a commodity, and universities like businesses.

Lucy Chapman-Kelly

Fighting course cuts at ANU

Students at the Australian National University in Canberra have defeated an attempt by campus Labor clubs to abolish the environment collective. 
Almost 300 students attended a mass meeting on 26 March, at which the new ANU Students’ Association executive, representing both factions of the ALP student clubs, tried to amend the constitution to create a committee in place of the collective, strip 80 percent of its budget, place the new committee under strict executive oversight and strip students of the right to vote at meetings. 
The pretext for such a brazen assault on environmental activism came from an audit conducted by a consultancy firm last year. The firm, NFP Success, specialises in advising not-for-profit organisations on how to “reach new levels of excellence”. 
Yet student unions are not like other NGOs. Nor should they be. Student unions are activist bodies steeped in a democratic culture and shaped by leading fights for justice. The environment collective has a 50-year history of supporting campaigns such as the anti-war movement when the US and Australia invaded Iraq, the Woomera Detention Centre refugee breakout, the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, the climate strikes and the Palestine solidarity movement. 
Auditors like NFP Success have no sympathy for this history, as its recommendations show. While the Gaza Solidarity Encampment was still active last year, its governance review claimed that there had been “too much focus on pro-Palestine campaigning” and argued: “[I]t is crucial the president avoids becoming too involved in divisive political campaigns”. 
The new ANUSA executive has its own reasons for opposing the environment collective. The ALP student clubs are stacked with careerist apparatchiks loyally promoting party policy, such as support for fossil fuel expansion and Israel’s war on Gaza. The consultant’s report provided a pretext for them to go on the offensive. They froze the collective’s funds earlier this year and drafted constitutional changes to abolish it. This semester, they have publicly argued that students can’t be trusted to run the collective. 
Our victory was not guaranteed. The traditions of activist student unionism are not as strong as they used to be. And anti-activist arguments cloaked in legalism can always find an audience on university campuses. The ANUSA executive had the resources of the student union behind it, sending out several official all-student emails. It also had sizeable social networks through which to call in favours. Supporters of the ANUSA executive were even found to be bribing students with offers of free beers in exchange for their votes.
The fightback coalition included Socialist Alternative members, students from the Gaza Solidarity Encampment, the No Cuts at ANU campaign and, of course, members of the environment collective. 
We handed out leaflets around the campus, put up posters, made announcements in lectures, called around stay-in-touch lists and built networks through WhatsApp group chats. 
We only needed 25 percent of the vote to defeat the attack, but we won 42 percent. Importantly, our vote represented students who were won to a vision of left-wing, democratic, activist student unionism. 
Those traditions are more important now than ever as we stare down historic staff cuts, the threat of a rising far right inspired by Donald Trump, and the rolling catastrophes of climate disaster and war.

How we saved the ANU environment collective

Queensland University of Technology (QUT) has put the future of its creative arts programs at risk. The university paused the 2025 undergraduate dance intake to conduct a review, which quickly expanded to include all performing arts courses. The review’s terms of reference note that performing arts degrees are “experiencing fluctuating student demand, attrition and research performance ... amid increased competition and national decline in interest in these study areas”. 
Meanwhile, performing arts students received an email framing the review as a way to “support our commitment to continually improving our courses and to meet student expectations and aspirations”. The reason for the review is likely to justify attacks on QUT students’ right to study specialised degrees.
QUT has been on the attack against performing arts courses and staff conditions since 2021, when it cut the dance performance degree and merged three faculties. QUT sacked up to 1,500 staff during the pandemic due to expected lost profits. In reality, QUT’s annual report recorded a $139.9 million operating surplus in 2021, $17.85 million of which came from reduced “employee-related expenses”. In other words, QUT saved millions through staff cuts and wage freezes.
QUT is the only public university in Queensland to offer specialised degrees in subjects like dance and technical production, which was cut to a minor this year. Cutting the dance degree would mean students in Queensland would be forced to travel interstate or pay for training at expensive private studios.
Staff at QUT are also under threat. After years of transitioning towards prerecorded lectures, bigger class sizes, and with staff squeezed by just ten minutes of paid marking time, QUT has turned its sights on the performing arts staff, too. 
The teachers and the staff who maintain the state-of-the-art facilities are now at risk of redundancies. Dance students are taught at a $60 million facility at the Kelvin Grove campus, which boasts specialised dance studios, black box drama theatres, concert halls and recording studios. Margaret Sheil, QUT’s vice-chancellor, seems willing to throw all of this away to prioritise profit-making. 
University managers are looking at other cost-cutting measures. The QUT Art Museum has had all planned 2025 exhibitions cancelled. There is no better explanation for this than the one provided by Sheil herself at a staff forum last year: “It’s looking at some of the nice-to-do things that had more benefits for the community than QUT”. 
This is the problem with university education being run for profit. For QUT managers, creative arts are “nice-to-do” and good for society but are not big moneymakers. Compare the treatment of the arts to the brand new $7.8 million Space Technology Precinct. There is cash to burn when the university can guarantee large research grants and outside funding.
The cuts are not isolated to QUT; cost-cutting is on the agenda across Australia. The threat posed to performing arts degrees is the canary in the coal mine. They set a precedent for future cuts in other faculties.
Students facing course cuts at any university have a responsibility to stand up. We should not only study whatever we want, regardless of how profitable, but also defend the rights of the staff that facilitate it. 
University education should be free, publicly owned and funded, and run for the benefit of students and society, not for vice-chancellors and administrations to make millions of dollars.

Erin Milne

Queensland University of Technology takes aim at performing arts degrees

A student at the University of Sydney has been threatened with suspension for writing Palestine solidarity statements on a whiteboard using a non-permanent marker. It is the latest of dozens of misconduct charges levelled against activists by the university over the last year.
Luna,* a postgraduate international student, received a notice of misconduct from the academic registrar on 3 February, alleging that she engaged in “inappropriate and unreasonable conduct” by writing the following slogans in January:
USyd invest in weapons manufacturing (Thales, Lockheed Martin), USyd supports genocide in Gaza.
USYD Vice Chancellor Mark Scott supports Gaza Genocide.
From the river to the sea Palestine will be free.
As of 13 January 2025, 46,600+ dead in Gaza. USyd cut ties with genocide.
The university appears to have used CCTV footage and electronic student card tracking to identify Luna.
The Registrar claims that the conduct breaches several university policies, including clauses in the Campus Access Policy introduced at the end of last year in response to the Palestine solidarity campaign. 
In addition to purportedly prejudicing “the good order and government of the university” and “good name or academic standing of the university”, writing on a whiteboard also allegedly constitutes “protest activity on university lands”. Such activity must be “orderly and peaceful”, cannot be held inside any building, and requires 72-hours advance notice to the administration. 
The alleged conduct is also said to be an act of graffiti, which is defined as “the placement of posters, notices, advertisements and similar items” on any area that has not been “designated for official notices” by the university.
Basically, the administration has ruled that students who want to exercise their democratic rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and to protest must organise something that is nothing like a protest using means of communication that prevent any meaningful mass communication. Even writing on a whiteboard is beyond the pale.
The administration has told Luna that she will likely be expelled, suspended or receive a reprimand if she is found guilty of the alleged misconduct. It also warns that “the penalties applied will be more severe [bold in original] in the event that you deny the conduct, which is ultimately found to be substantiated, than if you admit the conduct at this stage”.
This threat—an attempt to pressure Luna not to defend herself against the allegations—is far from empty, given her visa status. As a transgender woman from a country that criminalises and punishes non-binary expressions of gender, she is currently seeking asylum in Australia. For now, she holds a student visa, which means her right to remain in the country depends on her continued enrolment. 
Luna wrote to the university on 24 February asking for more time to respond to the charges. Specifically, she requested an extension until after 21 March (when she will gain a bridging visa) so that she can “assess this matter in a clear-headed fashion without worrying about being deported to danger”. The university refused the request the following day, reaffirming that the “likely penalty if the conduct is admitted at this stage is suspension”.
In its initial misconduct notice, the university insisted that the entire process “must be kept confidential”; otherwise, it “may take disciplinary action”. This clause is ubiquitous in misconduct charges at Sydney University, supposedly to stop victimisation against complainants. It might make sense in cases involving accusations of serious abuse or violence. But it is illegitimate to include the clause in cases where the administration itself levels misconduct charges against activists. One can only assume the intention is to keep the spurious misconduct process opaque and free from external scrutiny. 
After the details of the complaint were made public on 5 March, the university quickly entered crisis management, publishing two responses on its website. The first claimed that the suspension threat was a simple “administrative error” and, finally, granted Luna a time extension to respond. 
The second stated that the administration had contacted Luna, “confirmed the likely penalty range does not include potential suspension” and “apologised”. The university refused to relent following private communication with Luna but quickly backed down (partially—the charges still stand) after being forced to answer publicly for its behaviour. 
This entire case is a farce. Student activism has historically included acts far more rebellious than scrawling solidarity messages on a classroom whiteboard. Sydney University appears determined to wipe out criticism of its dirty deals with weapons manufacturers and suppress support for the Palestinian cause—or at least to extraordinarily limit how such support can be expressed.
* Name has been changed at the student’s request to protect them from retaliation.

Eleanor Morley

Sydney University threatens to suspend student for writing on a whiteboard

The University of Technology Sydney has marked International Women’s Day by banning a poster asking the question: “Why are teenage boys so misogynistic?”. 
The meeting was called to discuss rising sexist attitudes among, and the broader right-wing drift of, young men. Numerous indicators point to this reality, including a recent King’s College London survey showing that young men are far more likely than young women, and even older men, to say that men have it tougher than women today. In the United States, Donald Trump increased his support among young men by 15 percentage points last year compared to the previous election; in Australia, young men support Liberal leader Peter Dutton in much higher numbers than young women. Also, a recent Monash University study found that female teachers are facing a rise in misogynistic behaviour everywhere—and many are quitting the profession because of it. 
One woman who attended the meeting told the audience that in her first-year business tutorial, the tutor had to tell off men in the class because they were rating every woman who spoke in the discussion in the zoom chat.
Most universities have put up posters celebrating women and our contributions to society. But the UTS administration has sided with Andrew Tate and Donald Trump stans. 
UTS was alerted to the poster by at least one male student on campus, who also emailed the UTS Socialist Alternative club complaining that he feels “unwelcome and stereotyped” by the mere presence of a poster advertising a campus meeting about the growth of the far right and its expression in the political attitudes of young men. 
For years, the political right called the left “snowflakes”. People wrote hundreds of books and articles lamenting the “coddling” culture in universities and about how the political left and progressives can’t cope with ideas they don’t agree with. Right-wing provocateurs such as Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson made famous phrases such as “facts don’t care about your feelings”.
How the tide has turned. It seems that young men from the political right, like those at UTS, are now the ones who might start campaigning for safe spaces and trigger warnings. 
The Centre for Social Justice &amp; Inclusion handles complaints relating to sex, gender identity, race and disability discrimination. According to its equity policy, it seeks “diversity, fairness, social justice and ethical treatment of others”. The policy seems to have been written with oppressed groups in mind, so it’s remarkable to see it being used against women on campus. 
The directive to remove the poster is also related to the university fad of introducing policies to protect the “psychosocial safety” of staff and students, which were initially designed to silence Palestine solidarity activists. The feelings and emotions of those in positions of power are being protected while those trying to address injustices face disciplinary hearings. 
A staff member from Activate, which manages campus life, instructed the club to remove the posters during a phone call with Yasmine Johnson, UTS Socialist Alternative club president and the woman who hosted the meeting.
“He said to me, ‘You followed all the correct procedures, but unfortunately you are going to have to take these down. This has gotten around the uni top level very fast—the deputy vice-chancellor, the equity department, everyone knows’”, Johnson recounted to Red Flag. “He even said that the deputy VC instructed that the posters be removed as they violate the UTS equity policy.” 
That university management is worried about some men being distressed because people are discussing sexism tells you something about the political shift that is happening. 
Johnson reported being mobbed by Trump supporters while she handed out leaflets for the meeting. They loudly professed their love for the racist and sexist president of the United States. They were precisely the sort of young men who have been politically drawn to the far right and influenced by the violent misogyny of the sex-trafficker Andrew Tate. They are much more confident to express their bigoted attitudes, which will only become worse as institutions like UTS support them.
By not wanting to trigger any boys on campus who have trouble distinguishing between fact (young men are pretty sexist) and their feelings (a poster made me sad), the UTS administration has silenced the free speech of young women who are trying to fight back against the growth of a global far right.

SafeWork NSW’s report on antisemitism at Sydney University is fake news

Melbourne University expels Palestine solidarity activists

When Palestine solidarity protesters defied police at the ANU

The patterns of censorship across Australian universities

University of WA bans statements that ‘cause harm’, disciplines student for defending free speech

Fighting course cuts at ANU

How we saved the ANU environment collective

Queensland University of Technology takes aim at performing arts degrees

Sydney University threatens to suspend student for writing on a whiteboard

University of Technology Sydney stands with boys with big feelings

Other Media

Shop

Manage Your Subscription

Contact Us