Experts say university campuses are increasingly polarised, with academics fearful of speaking out and university leaders trying to protect staff from internet trolls.
Debates about free speech on campus, and academic freedom, erupted in August 2018 when Don Brash was initially stopped from speaking at Massey University and then in 2021 when seven professors at the University of Auckland signed a letter about Mātauranga Māori in the NCEA science curriculum.
And it has all flared up at Te Herenga-Waka Victoria University of Wellington in the past few weeks.
Dr Michael Johnston, a senior fellow at free-market think-tank the New Zealand initiative, is part of a panel about free speech on campus at Victoria University that was originally postponed due to a backlash about the lack of diversity and perceived right-wing leanings of the panel - including him.
The university said it re-formatted and added a diversity of panellists to the event after listening to feedback from staff and student groups.
It will be divided into two groups, with a range of advocates and academics, held in a lecture theatre and moderated by RNZ's Corin Dann.
Johnston, a former academic and associate dean of education at the university, said it's an example of how campuses are becoming increasingly polarised.
"The best way out of that is a free and open sharing and contesting of ideas, that's what the university is supposed to be a venue for, and we shouldn't want to curtail that in any way."
He said the university response to the Mātauranga Māori letter in the Listener in 2021, and a review the University of Canterbury conducted into a paper by China academic Anne-Marie Brady, were two examples in the recent past.
Concerns about free speech were not limited to Victoria University.
The University of Canterbury was currently reviewing its policy on academic freedom, which law professor Ursula Cheer said was the subject of vigorous debate.
"It's certainly happening that universities are drawing up policies relating to academic freedom and attempting to guide it. Which I don't believe complies with the law and is of concern - is of great concern.
"I certainly do think there is an atmosphere in universities of academics becoming more afraid to speak on certain issues."
She said the Education and Training Act enshrined academic freedom at tertiary institutions within it, specifically that academic staff and students can question and test received wisdom, put forward new ideas, or state uncontroversial or unpopular opinions within the law.
Victoria University vice-chancellor Professor Nic Smith was consulting staff and students on a set of principles about public discourse discussions and hosting alternative views on campus.
These principles included that conversations should be respectful, mana-preserving and evidence-based, and that the content of conversations should align with the universities' values.
Johnston said the principle seeking to confine debate on campus to the university's values could shut speech down.
But Smith said that was not the intent, and he was trying to protect staff who speak out from those who attack them, including internet trolls.
"My hope is that actually we can embrace and lean into uncomfortable and challenging conversations."
He said most organisations support conversations to take place in line with their values, which include respect, responsibility, fairness, integrity and empathy.
But he also stressed that conversations should be evidence-based, and that not "anybody and everybody" could speak at the university.
"If we want to have the flat-earthers they can take to what we formerly refer to as Twitter."
ACT leader David Seymour said the Education and Training Act was not working effectively enough if a free speech debate was put off due to the presence of right-wing voices.
He said the Education and Training Act will be changed within the next two years to require universities to adopt a free speech policy if they wanted to receive government funding.
He expected universities to adopt a similar model to the university of Chicago.
"It should be very clear that people are able to express views, that others may not like, but claims of emotional harm and emotional safety are not sufficient reasons to prevent somebody from speaking."
Smith said he did not want the government's policy to have a chilling effect on academics or students who have nuanced views, or who change their mind.
"At universities it's really important that we can support our academics, that we can support, experts, that we can support the middle ground who can bring context, nuance and evidence to these discussions to be participants.
"And we don't just end up with the polarised extremes shouting at each other from what they each are asserting is the high moral ground."
But Johnston said controversial - even dangerous ideas - must be confronted.
"You put up your hand at question time and get stuck in. We need to have a more robust culture for the exchange and discussion of ideas. I think that's what's new - that now that seems to be a controversial idea in itself."
The issues will be discussed at the Victoria University event - titled 'The role of universities in supporting freedom of speech', on 28 May.
