In the wake of a record fine to the University of Sussex, the Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom at the Office for Students Arif Ahmed has written to vice-chancellors urging them to review their institutions’ policies on sex and gender to avoid similar penalties.
Last month, Sussex received the largest ever monetary penalty from the OfS for trans-inclusion policies which were deemed to have violated regulations related to free speech and academic freedom. In particular, four statements in the University’s inclusivity policies were highlighted as problematic. These included requirements for “any materials” to “positively represent trans people” and a statement that the curriculum would “not rely on or reinforce stereotypical assumptions about trans people”.
Now, the OfS is reaching out to other universities, urging them to review their policies and ensure they are meeting “regulatory obligations”.
The higher education regular did not name the specific vice-chancellors who had received the director’s letter, but merely referred to a “handful of providers where [the OfS has] identified that they have – on the face of it – similar policies in this area to Sussex”.
CAF recently reported that 38 other British universities had policies highly similar or even identical to at least one of those highlighted in the OfS Sussex report. The origins of these policies were subsequently traced back to a template for trans-inclusion policies created by the Equality Challenge Unit, which has since become Advance HE.
Following this report, Advance HE’s chief executive, Alison Johns, sent an email to university vice-chancellors acknowledging that “certain policy statements cited in the [OfS report on Sussex] findings originated, in part, from a template developed by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) in 2010”. Johns’ letter went on to emphasise that the “template in question does not reflect [Advance HE’s] current approach or guidance on free speech, protected beliefs and good relations”, adding that the organisation had itself “conducted a thorough review of existing materials to ensure alignment with regulatory requirements”.
Finally, Alison Johns urged vice-chancellors to adopt a similar approach at their own institutions by reviewing “trans inclusion policies and web pages and ensure that any legacy language from this template cited by the OfS case report is removed or updated”.
Universities appear to have taken the hint. Many have already removed trans policies from their websites. In one example, the University of Leeds has updated its website, stating that the trans inclusion policies “is currently being reviewed in the light of the ruling [against Sussex] by the Office for Students of 26 March 2025”.
Likewise, the University of Essex has removed a link to the University’s “approach to supporting trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming staff” from its webpage. An internet archive version of the page reveals that this link was active as recently as 21 March – just days before the OfS report was released. The Essex’s website also lists its “Trans Inclusion Booklet”, “LGBTQ+ Inclusion Guidance” and “Gender Identity and Transitioning Policy” as “currently undergoing review”. A spokesperson told Times Higher Education that the University keeps its “policies and guidance under regular review” and that these examples were “part of our agreed review process”.
Still, there can be little doubt that the £585,000 fine for Sussex is part of the motivation behind the sudden policy reviews. No doubt Arif Ahmed’s comments that the fine could have been upwards of £3.7m and that there is “potential for higher fines in the future”, added to the sense of urgency.
The OfS case report on Sussex said that the “maximum penalty which may be imposed is capped by the Monetary Penalties Regulations at the higher of either 2 per cent of a provider’s qualifying income, or £500,000.” “Qualifying income” refers to the total annual amount a university takes in through tuition fees and OfS grants. Many institutions report incomes in the hundreds of millions each year, meaning that future penalties could easily reach into the millions.
This is the context in which Arif Ahmed wrote to university VCs that “If you are not doing so already, I encourage you to review relevant policies […] and consider steps you may need to take to ensure the university is meeting its regulatory obligations in these areas”.
In the letter, Ahmed went on to say that he is “keen to meet [the VCs] to discuss the steps you are taking and would be pleased to support your work in an appropriate way”. According to Times Higher Education, the free speech director has already met with some vice-chancellors to discuss the regulatory framework governing freedom of speech and academic freedom.
Abhishek Saha from the London Universities’ Council for Academic Freedom (LUCAF) called the letter from Ahmed “very significant” as it “serves both as a warning from the OfS to universities potentially in breach of free speech regulations, as well as an invitation to collaborate in revising internal policies”.
Saha is right. This letter is an opportunity for universities across the country to review and, where need be, change their policies to provide adequate protections for academic freedom before further penalties become necessary.