The new Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, Lord Smith of Finsbury, has said he will place the defence of academic freedom and free speech at the centre of his role – although previous statements point to a more ambivalent approach when navigating politicised research priorities and external ideological pressures, including those linked to China.
In his most detailed public comments on the issue since taking office in July, the Labour peer said there had been “occasions when Cambridge has hit the national press over particular freedom of speech issues” and described the protection of open inquiry as his “number one priority”.
His remarks come amid cautious optimism among those concerned about the protection of lawful speech on campus, particularly for gender-critical academics after years in which public disagreement carried significant personal and professional risk. A string of recent tribunal rulings confirmed that belief in the immutable reality of biological sex is protected under the Equality Act 2010. Separately, the Supreme Court’s judgment in For Women Scotland held that, for the purposes of that legislation, the terms “sex”, “man” and “woman” refer to biological sex rather than gender identity, leaving universities little option but to revisit policies that blurred the distinction and to align them with the clarified legal position. Most significantly, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act came into force on 1 August, strengthening institutions’ duties and giving the Office for Students new powers of enforcement.
Asked about the ongoing disputes surrounding women-only spaces – brought into focus by the newly launched Cambridge University Society of Women, whose membership is restricted to biological females – Smith attempted to strike an even tone. “There is an important ability for women to be able to feel safe in spaces that are designated for them,” he said, while adding that transgender students must “have spaces available to them as well” and that their needs should be “genuinely met”.
He declined, however, to endorse a clear institutional position, telling Varsity that “it’s not up to the University to tell the people who are creating this society what they should be doing”. Turning to the wider debate about the importance of sex in policy and law, he said: “I disagree strongly with much of what Kathleen Stock has to say, but I would defend her right to say it.” Stock resigned from the University of Sussex in 2021 following sustained pressure and protests over her views on gender identity.
Smith also addressed concerns about foreign interference in research, following revelations that an investigation into Sheffield Hallam University’s suspension of work on human-rights abuses in China has been referred to counter-terrorism police. Staff in China reported being threatened by individuals from China’s National Security Service, who demanded the research be halted. Access to the university’s websites from China was then blocked, hampering recruitment efforts. Months later, in February 2025, administrators instructed the project’s lead researcher, Professor Laura Murphy, to cease work on supply chains and forced labour.
Academic freedom, Smith argued, must remain “the bottom line”, and he rejected “kowtowing to anyone […] trying to determine what a professor can or can’t research”. Nonetheless, after acknowledging the risks, he cautioned against blanket disengagement from China, describing it as “an increasingly important part of the current world” and suggesting the task was instead to “get the balance right”.
Smith was elected in July after a closely contested race in which around 25,000 alumni and staff cast votes. Ten candidates stood in the ranked ballot, from which Smith, a former Culture Secretary and (until his appointment) Master of Pembroke College, emerged ahead of TV personality Sandi Toksvig and the cross-bench peer Lord Browne.
During his time at Pembroke, Smith built a reputation for taking a broadly supportive stance on free speech. Following the controversy at Gonville & Caius College in 2022, when the Master and Senior Tutor denounced the gender-critical campaigner Helen Joyce ahead of her invited talk, he said: “if the same event had occurred in our College, I would have encouraged our students to attend, and if they disagreed with Ms Joyce, to engage in constructive and courteous debate.” And after the columnist Peter Hitchens was de-platformed by Portsmouth University Students’ Union – because his views were “not aligned” with its “vibrant celebration of the LGBT+ community” that month – Smith encouraged the Pembroke Politics Society to invite him instead.
Ahead of the Chancellor election, Alumni for Free Speech circulated a questionnaire on free expression and academic freedom to all candidates. Smith’s answers presented a broadly liberal stance. He rejected ideological training outright: “I would not wish to see any requirement to undertake training on ‘gender ideology’ or ‘critical race theory’,” he wrote. Training, he suggested, should instead focus on “preventing sexual harassment” and promoting respectful conduct, but “ideological training should not have a place”.
On the politicisation of research, however, his position was more equivocal. He endorsed the principle that “research funding should be sought and allocated according to the quality of the research and the possibility of beneficial outcome, not on the basis of ideology or opinion or the requirements of funders or governments.” Yet when asked whether universities should seek evidence of engagement with EDI schemes such as Stonewall or Athena Swan in job applications, promotions or research approvals, he replied: “I would not wish to require evidence of such activity or engagement as a necessary part of an application; but if such evidence were offered I would wish to take it into account in a positive way in considering the application.”
The position of Chancellor stretches back more than 800 years to the University’s foundation. Although the post is largely ceremonial and carries no executive responsibilities, the role retains influence with the Chancellor acting as a sounding board for senior figures and serving as an ambassador for Cambridge in public life.
This article forms part of the Committee for Academic Freedom’s ongoing monitoring of developments in UK higher education. To receive monthly updates and analysis on cases affecting academic freedom, subscribe to our newsletter here.