Latest news with #GovernmentInformationPublicAccess
The Advertiser
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
'Respect': community calls out behaviour at Newcastle council meetings
CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits.
West Australian
21-05-2025
- Politics
- West Australian
‘New Jim Crow': Sydney uni slammed over plan to ‘segregate' Jewish students during Palestine protest
The University of Sydney proposed providing a separate entrance to exams 'to ensure that Jewish students' could avoid a pro-Palestine encampment in what a Jewish leader has described as 'segregation' and a 'new Jim Crow'. Emails obtained under a Government Information Public Access (GIPA) application shed new light on the university's rolling response to the pro-Palestine encampment, which took over the campus for almost two months last year. In an email on May 14, 2024 titled 'Student encampment planning #20', USYD associate director of risk strategy and operations Lauren Macaulay detailed discussions from the university's midday meetings about the exam period. '(The exam) should go ahead in the MacLaurin Hall and the Great Hall but we need to be clear of our expectations and that it would be counter-productive for both our students and the protest itself for them to disrupt exam activities,' the minutes stated. 'Mitigations include installing the large electronic signs (big and visible) stating our expectations and ensure that Jewish students have ways to avoid the encampment when gaining entry to exams (see actions). 'If there is disruption we need to manage this through our misconduct/consequence framework and through contingency planning (e.g. special consideration and a new exam in the replacement exam period) (see actions).' Further actions were detailed and assigned to various staff, including communication to student groups, discussion of 'safe spaces for students and staff' – including exam spaces – and 'contingency planning processes offline'. Jack Pinczewski, a board member at the Great Synagogue in Sydney, submitted to a state parliament inquiry into anti-Semitism in NSW – the first session of which was held in Sydney this week – that the university 'took the view that to separate Jewish students from their peers was the most effective way of ensuring their safety'. 'Despite their good intentions – to protect Jewish students – that university executives contemplated separate entries for Jewish students to exam rooms is an impossibly shameful racist enterprise,' Mr Pinczewski said. 'As a society, would we accept separate entries to buildings for Asian or Aboriginal students? We would not. 'We acknowledge that notions of 'separate but equal' is not equality at all. What university executives were engaged in through this process was, likely inadvertently, a new form of Jim Crow,' he added, referring to the US laws and practices that segregated black people from whites. It was not immediately clear to what extent the plans were enacted, though the proposals were defended by a university spokesperson who said there was 'no suggestion (the access points) were intended for a select group of students'. 'Tent-based protest camps were a new phenomenon for Sydney and other universities around the world, and we worked hard to ensure our campus remained peaceful, our community safe, and our teaching and research could continue uninterrupted,' the spokesperson said. 'During the exam period we implemented a number of measures to safeguard both the wellbeing of our students and the academic integrity of our assessments. 'These included offering different access options for all students or staff wishing to avoid the encampment, and we installed electronic signage where exams were taking place to remind members of the encampment that disruptions would not be tolerated. 'The different access points offered were available for anyone wishing to use them, there was no suggestion they were intended for a select group of students.' Mr Pinczewski accused USYD of having 'again shirked accountability for their failure to keep Jewish students and staff safe'. 'Their denial of what exists in black and white – contemporaneous documents showing senior university executives were set on segregating Jewish students from their peers – calls into question their commitments to the Jewish community since October last year,' he said. 'As long as attitudes like this persist, one can but wonder if the university's apologies really mean anything at all. 'The university should be called before the Legislative Council committee inquiring into anti-Semitism to account for themselves.' USYD's scramble to respond to 'unprecedented' crisis The emails obtained under the GIPA application reveal the wide-reaching but sometimes frantic response The University of Sydney and its staff took to what was an unprecedented protest on its campus, including damage to the quadrangle and counter-protests. Staff kept diligent records of incidents, and corresponded among departments ahead of time about potential protest and counter-protest activity, including when the right-wing Australian Jewish Association attended the site. 'Political differences aside, the AJA is planning to come to openly antagonise the situation,' an email from an unknown sender to campus security stated on May 2. 'I am unsure if non-student and staff groups are allowed on campus in order to protest, but Campus Security, and the police, need to be ready for such an event.' In an email dated May 2, meeting minutes stated that staff had agreed that 'should police intervene' in the protest, the 'priority should be on de-escalating violence'. The school's social media teams also provided updates to staff on what was being posted online, including from the AJA and mainstream media. In a 'wellbeing update' dated May 17, staff noted that 'Muslim protesters' reported 'feeling profiled' when trying to enter the library. 'Sarah reiterated to protective services staff that they can't just pick out certain people for screening,' the update stated. 'Reported instances female SUMSA students were being sworn at around campus (particularly when close to roads).' Questions were also raised in an email chain that included the vice-chancellor about whether face coverings contravened university policy. Following the end of the encampment in June 2024, the university introduced a new Campus Access Policy 'designed to better safeguard the wellbeing of our students and staff while ensuring free speech on campus, and are reviewing and updating our relevant policies and processes'. The policy, which followed an independent review into the university's policies and procedures, made several changes, including a 'New Civility Rule' requiring speakers at the university to 'make the meaning of contested words and phrases clear'. NSW Council for Civil Liberties chief executive Tim Roberts warned that USYD had 'shown a tendency to overreact and, in doing so, undermined both the ideals of open free debate in a university' and were 'taking a position where they're restricting conversations'. 'If you specifically single out students, a group of students in the response, what you only seek to do is further embolden sort of divisions and the divisive aspect of debates, as opposed as coming at it from a human rights perspective,' Mr Roberts said. In the statement, the USYD spokesperson said the university remained 'absolutely committed to freedom of speech and academic freedom with zero tolerance for any form of racism, threats to safety, hate speech, intimidation, threatening speech, bullying or unlawful harassment, including anti-Semitic or Islamophobic language or behaviour'. The university also instituted changes to its campus security set-up, including the installation of 50 additional CCTV cameras. It also pledged to engage with the Jewish student leadership and with the Sydney Jewish Museum and has five further changes, including about social media use, pending.
Perth Now
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Perth Now
‘New Jim Crow': Uni move slammed
The University of Sydney proposed providing a separate entrance to exams 'to ensure that Jewish students' could avoid a pro-Palestine encampment in what a Jewish leader has described as 'segregation' and a 'new Jim Crow'. Emails obtained under a Government Information Public Access (GIPA) application shed new light on the university's rolling response to the pro-Palestine encampment, which took over the campus for almost two months last year. In an email on May 14, 2024 titled 'Student encampment planning #20', USYD associate director of risk strategy and operations Lauren Macaulay detailed discussions from the university's midday meetings about the exam period. '(The exam) should go ahead in the MacLaurin Hall and the Great Hall but we need to be clear of our expectations and that it would be counter-productive for both our students and the protest itself for them to disrupt exam activities,' the minutes stated. 'Mitigations include installing the large electronic signs (big and visible) stating our expectations and ensure that Jewish students have ways to avoid the encampment when gaining entry to exams (see actions). 'If there is disruption we need to manage this through our misconduct/consequence framework and through contingency planning (e.g. special consideration and a new exam in the replacement exam period) (see actions).' The University of Sydney proposed providing a separate entrance to exams 'to ensure that Jewish students' could avoid a pro-Palestine encampment. NewsWire / Max Mason-Hubers Credit: News Corp Australia Further actions were detailed and assigned to various staff, including communication to student groups, discussion of 'safe spaces for students and staff' – including exam spaces – and 'contingency planning processes offline'. Jack Pinczewski, a board member at the Great Synagogue in Sydney, submitted to a state parliament inquiry into anti-Semitism in NSW – the first session of which was held in Sydney this week – that the university 'took the view that to separate Jewish students from their peers was the most effective way of ensuring their safety'. 'Despite their good intentions – to protect Jewish students – that university executives contemplated separate entries for Jewish students to exam rooms is an impossibly shameful racist enterprise,' Mr Pinczewski said. 'As a society, would we accept separate entries to buildings for Asian or Aboriginal students? We would not. 'We acknowledge that notions of 'separate but equal' is not equality at all. What university executives were engaged in through this process was, likely inadvertently, a new form of Jim Crow,' he added, referring to the US laws and practices that segregated black people from whites. Great Synagogue board member Jack Pinczewski with Great Synagogue chief minister and rabbi Benjamin Elton at the inquiry into anti-Semitism in NSW. NewsWire / John Appleyard Credit: News Corp Australia It was not immediately clear to what extent the plans were enacted, though the proposals were defended by a university spokesperson who said there was 'no suggestion (the access points) were intended for a select group of students'. 'Tent-based protest camps were a new phenomenon for Sydney and other universities around the world, and we worked hard to ensure our campus remained peaceful, our community safe, and our teaching and research could continue uninterrupted,' the spokesperson said. 'During the exam period we implemented a number of measures to safeguard both the wellbeing of our students and the academic integrity of our assessments. 'These included offering different access options for all students or staff wishing to avoid the encampment, and we installed electronic signage where exams were taking place to remind members of the encampment that disruptions would not be tolerated. 'The different access points offered were available for anyone wishing to use them, there was no suggestion they were intended for a select group of students.' Mr Pinczewski accused USYD of having 'again shirked accountability for their failure to keep Jewish students and staff safe'. A Pro-Palestinian rally at The University of Sydney. NewsWire / David Swift Credit: News Corp Australia 'Their denial of what exists in black and white – contemporaneous documents showing senior university executives were set on segregating Jewish students from their peers – calls into question their commitments to the Jewish community since October last year,' he said. 'As long as attitudes like this persist, one can but wonder if the university's apologies really mean anything at all. 'The university should be called before the Legislative Council committee inquiring into anti-Semitism to account for themselves.' USYD's scramble to respond to 'unprecedented' crisis The emails obtained under the GIPA application reveal the wide-reaching but sometimes frantic response The University of Sydney and its staff took to what was an unprecedented protest on its campus, including damage to the quadrangle and counter-protests. Staff kept diligent records of incidents, and corresponded among departments ahead of time about potential protest and counter-protest activity, including when the right-wing Australian Jewish Association attended the site. 'Political differences aside, the AJA is planning to come to openly antagonise the situation,' an email from an unknown sender to campus security stated on May 2. 'I am unsure if non-student and staff groups are allowed on campus in order to protest, but Campus Security, and the police, need to be ready for such an event.' In an email dated May 2, meeting minutes stated that staff had agreed that 'should police intervene' in the protest, the 'priority should be on de-escalating violence'. Pro-Israel protesters also visited the encampment. NewsWire / David Swift Credit: News Corp Australia The school's social media teams also provided updates to staff on what was being posted online, including from the AJA and mainstream media. In a 'wellbeing update' dated May 17, staff noted that 'Muslim protesters' reported 'feeling profiled' when trying to enter the library. 'Sarah reiterated to protective services staff that they can't just pick out certain people for screening,' the update stated. 'Reported instances female SUMSA students were being sworn at around campus (particularly when close to roads).' Questions were also raised in an email chain that included the vice-chancellor about whether face coverings contravened university policy. Following the end of the encampment in June 2024, the university introduced a new Campus Access Policy 'designed to better safeguard the wellbeing of our students and staff while ensuring free speech on campus, and are reviewing and updating our relevant policies and processes'. The policy, which followed an independent review into the university's policies and procedures, made several changes, including a 'New Civility Rule' requiring speakers at the university to 'make the meaning of contested words and phrases clear'. NSW Council for Civil Liberties chief executive Tim Roberts warned that USYD had 'shown a tendency to overreact and, in doing so, undermined both the ideals of open free debate in a university' and were 'taking a position where they're restricting conversations'. 'If you specifically single out students, a group of students in the response, what you only seek to do is further embolden sort of divisions and the divisive aspect of debates, as opposed as coming at it from a human rights perspective,' Mr Roberts said. In the statement, the USYD spokesperson said the university remained 'absolutely committed to freedom of speech and academic freedom with zero tolerance for any form of racism, threats to safety, hate speech, intimidation, threatening speech, bullying or unlawful harassment, including anti-Semitic or Islamophobic language or behaviour'. The university also instituted changes to its campus security set-up, including the installation of 50 additional CCTV cameras. It also pledged to engage with the Jewish student leadership and with the Sydney Jewish Museum and has five further changes, including about social media use, pending.
