STEPHEN GLOVER on the hysteria of universities over Brexit

When the mighty and powerful are questioned by those they consider unimportant, they are apt to squash their interrogators with disdain — especially if they have something to hide.

So it has proved with Chris Heaton-Harris, an obscure junior whip and Tory MP. 

A few weeks ago he wrote to universities asking for the names of professors ‘involved in the teaching of European affairs, with particular reference to Brexit’.

Heaton-Harris might be accused of naivety in asking such a question. But his short letter did not warrant a tidal wave of incredulous abuse. If he had asked which dons were conducting extra-marital affairs, he would have provoked less outrage. 

First to condemn him was Lord (Chris) Patten — ex-Tory minister, last Governor of Hong Kong and a former European Commissioner — who is now Chancellor of Oxford University. 

His lordship is a man for whom the word ‘panjandrum’ might have been invented: large, ponderous, pompous and more pleased with himself than he has a right to be. The Chinese called him ‘Fatty Pang’.

The fanatically pro-EU Patten swatted away the rather humble letter as ‘an extraordinary example of outrageous and foolish behaviour — offensive and idiotic Leninism’. He accused the unthreatening Tory MP of treating British universities like ‘Chinese re-education camps’.

Strong stuff since the first leader of Soviet Russia, Vladimir Lenin, killed tens of thousands of his political enemies, or threw them in concentration camps. Unassuming Heaton-Harris is evidently a modern version of this monster — as well as being stupid, of course.

Lord Patten, a product of Balliol College, Oxford, thinks he is very clever. But actually he is being the stupid one in conjuring up Lenin, and Chinese re-education camps, in response to a letter politely seeking information from public, taxpayer-funded institutions.

The offending letter which was sent to universities across the country last week

Others also went over the top. Sally Hunt, chairwoman of the university lecturers’ union, said ‘the attempt by Heaton-Harris to compile a hit-list of professors has the acrid whiff of McCarthyism about it’. Senator Joseph McCarthy tried to expose communists in American public life in the early 1950s.

And Alistair Jarvis, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents university leaders, saw in the letter ‘an alarming attempt to censor or challenge academic freedom’.

Oh, I nearly forgot. The Lib Dems described Heaton-Harris’s missive as ‘chilling’.

I realise that post-referendum we inhabit a febrile, increasingly unreasoning country, but isn’t this reaction to the letter exaggerated almost to the point of lunacy? 

Heaton-Harris — I don’t want to insult him — is very far down the political greasy pole, which he has shown few signs of climbing.

He is no position to censor or challenge or send anyone to a gulag, even if he wanted to, which I very much doubt that he does. 

Whether this one-man band really is writing a book on Europe (as Jo Johnson, the universities minister, yesterday contended) I somewhat doubt, since he doesn’t obviously seem the writing type.

No, more likely, as a keen Brexiteer, he wanted to find out, albeit in a slightly clod-hopping way, how many young minds are being filled with anti-Brexit propaganda. 

Possibly he was trying to be provocative and already knew the answer — which is very many. 

We don’t need Heaton-Harris’s straightforward question, or the hysterical reaction to it, to conclude that the overwhelming majority of university dons are passionate Remainers.

One explanation for their strong pro-EU bias may be that many universities enjoy lavish grants from Brussels (the 24-strong Russell Group of leading universities receives £400million a year in research funds) which staff are frightened of losing.

According to a YouGov survey published in January, 81 per cent of professors and university lecturers voted Remain, whereas just 8 per cent voted Leave. I bet the latter keep their heads down over the coffee and croissants!

It’s probably a fair assumption that in most university political departments — where young student minds could be influenced if they are not already anti-Brexit — the proportion of convinced Remainers is even higher.

But these nice, fair-minded dons wouldn’t want to try to persuade anyone to their cause, would they? You bet they would! 

Lord Patten (left), the Chancellor of Oxford, accused Mr Heaton-Harris of treating universities like ‘Chinese re-education camps’, while Sally Hunt (right), chairwoman of the university lecturers’ union, said his request smacked of ‘McCarthyism’

Before the referendum in June 2016, there were numerous stories that universities were urging their students to vote to stay in the EU.

Sir Ivor Roberts, then President of Trinity College, Oxford (and a former British Ambassador to Rome) was accused of exhorting his students to vote Remain, though he denied the charge.

Sir Steve Smith, Vice-Chancellor of Exeter University, wrote an email to all undergraduates encouraging them to recognise the ‘benefits’ that ‘membership of the EU can offer’.

At Warwick University, the Head of the School of Modern Languages, Sean Hand, used his faculty’s mailing list to send a pro-EU letter signed by academics to undergraduates, urging them to vote with ‘the free mobility of students and staff in mind’. 

In fact, these and other institutions were probably infringing Charity Commission guidelines which stated that universities must be politically neutral in the run-up to the referendum.

But what do they care? Before the referendum, Remainers expected to win. Following the (to them) shocking result, there’s evidence that anti-Brexit propaganda is being poured down the throats of students even more enthusiastically.

The University of York wrote on its website: ‘We are proud that York voted to remain in the EU. We are proud that that vote demonstrates a spirit of generosity and openness that our students experience on a daily basis.’

Meanwhile, the Master of Downing College, Cambridge, Professor Geoffrey Grimmett, used a graduation dinner last June to warn students how disastrous Brexit will be.

Examined in this light, Chris Heaton-Harris’s letter doesn’t seem to me at all outrageous (to use Fatty Pang’s own word). 

Universities are public institutions in receipt of huge sums of public money, and the public surely has a right to know what goes on behind their hallowed portals. 

And all the more so if what was determined by the referendum — a narrow but decisive majority in favour of leaving — isn’t remotely reflected by the nature of the debate in the universities. In truth, it’s pretty clear that on this issue there is little debate at all.

But then universities don’t reflect the country politically. Weeks before the 2015 General Election, a poll in the Times Higher Educational Supplement found that 46 per cent of lecturers planned to vote Labour, 22 per cent Green and 9 per cent Lib Dem. Only 11 per cent brave souls intended to vote Tory.

In other words, the political affiliations of university staff, as well as their views on Brexit, are wildly out of kilter with what the general public thinks. What should be done about it? I am certainly not in favour of censoring or threatening the universities, and I don’t imagine Heaton-Harris is either.

Yet given that universities are publicly-funded, it is surely reasonable that people, including MPs and journalists, should be able to ask questions about how these institutions portray current political issues without being smeared as ‘Leninist’ or ‘McCarthyite’.

What is so deeply depressing is that universities, which are supposed to be the cradle of fresh ideas and open debate, should be revealing themselves as narrow-minded and prescriptive.

And so a lone MP with very little power is dismissed and abused by arrogant representatives of elitist institutions which have a great deal of power, and are used to having everything their own way.

It was partly as a revolt against such patronising attitudes that so many less privileged Britons voted for Brexit.