Oxford students were right to ‘no-platform’ Amber Rudd, and here’s why

Amber Rudd
Support us and go ad-free

On Thursday 5 March, former home secretary Amber Rudd was due to speak at an Oxford University event for International Women’s Day.

However, the student society organising the event cancelled it at short notice and withdrew Rudd’s invitation.


The UNWomen Oxford UK Society pulled the event after receiving criticism from students for inviting Rudd. Rudd then took to Twitter to complain about the students ‘no-platforming’ her. She ended her tweet with “#FreeSpeech”:

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

But proponents of free speech never seem to want to admit that everyone isn’t entitled to every platform available to share their views. And being denied one – relatively small – platform doesn’t equate to taking away Rudd’s freedom of speech. Especially given her Twitter following and TV appearances.

Deportation targets and Windrush

Given Rudd’s political track record, the decision to disinvite her makes total sense. In 2018, she resigned as home secretary because of her role in the Windrush scandal. Rudd initially denied setting deportation targets, and then backtracked, claiming there were “local targets for internal performance management”.

Rudd was forced to apologise over the treatment of Windrush citizens. Given the injustice that victims of Windrush deportations suffered, as a direct result of policies Rudd enforced, she was left with no choice but to resign in April 2018. The people now defending her freedom of speech would do well to remember that she isn’t immune to being held accountable for her decisions. Standing with the Windrush victims, and refusing to accept Rudd as a role model for young women, is one way of demanding accountability.

DWP and Universal Credit

Unfortunately, the disastrous treatment of Windrush citizens wasn’t enough to keep Rudd away from ministerial roles. She became work and pensions secretary in November 2018, heading the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

During Rudd’s time heading the DWP, Chris Williamson criticised her for defending the department despite the devastating impact of Universal Credit on poor people. Rudd later admitted that Universal Credit was pushing people towards using foodbanks. However, despite these issues and ongoing pressure, the roll out of Universal Credit has carried on.

Meanwhile, according to the UN, austerity measures implemented by successive Conservative governments have “disproportionately” affected “the poor, women, racial and ethnic minorities, children, single parents, and people with disabilities”.

A role model?

Rudd has access to a massive platform to share her views. But when are the Windrush victims, and those affected by austerity, able to criticise Amber Rudd? How often do they get invited to Oxford or the BBC to share their views?

Given Rudd’s track record, the student society was entirely within its rights to decide who should be providing an example for “encouraging young women into politics”. This isn’t about freedom of speech – it’s essentially about who is portrayed as a role model for women. And the misery Rudd has caused to so many people means this is a role that she should never play.

Featured image via screengrab

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. Never mind Amber Rudd’s record, bad as it is, the fact is that she is a hypocrite for asserting the primacy of free speech. The Tories have pushed the IHRA definition of ‘antisemitism’ whose sole purpose, according to the guy who drafted it, Kenneth Stern, is to ‘chill’ free speech.

      Because most universities are reluctant to adopt it the Tories are now threatening financial sanctions unless they adopt the IHRA which conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism.

    2. How many disabled people did she kill with her DWP policies? If an invading army had done these things to our most disadvantaged they would rightly be called atrocities.

      If the economy collapses and ends the west as a political power, or if the idiot Yanks start WW3 and lose, our criminal leaders may yet be brought to account. Imagine knowing that death is the only true escape you have? And even then history will record their deeds, when they’ll be no longer able to influence what is written, and they’ll be remembered as black hearts for far longer than they ever lived. That’s their futures.

    3. The students denied themselves a chance to grill her on these issues and record it to spread the truth. Now she can stay home, well protected by a right-wing press that will champion her as a free speech hero, which is the total opposite outcome the students intended (i assume).
      It’s sad the Canary defends this decision and still thinks de-platforming is a good idea when it always backfires.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.