What I saw at the Oxford Union proves why free speech must be protected

"This House believes the West is right to be suspicious of Islam" - in 2026, it's hard to imagine a situation where such a question wouldn't generate fervent reactions from both sides of the political divide.

Present a divided nation preoccupied by Israel vs Palestine, immigration and the very meaning of British identity with this question, and heighten emotions further by putting Tommy Robinson at the forefront of the event.

This was what took place at the Oxford Union last night - Britain's oldest and most prestigious university debating society - in spite of belligerent and calculated attempts from all directions to make sure the event could never go ahead.

Tommy Robinson, flanked by the actor and commentator Laurence Fox, the writer Jonathan Sacerdoti and various student speakers, battled across the dispatch box with Islamic speaker Abdullah al Andalusi, the podcaster Michael Doward, the Oxford Union president Arwa Elrayess, and of course, the esteemed GB News Presenter and former Cabinet Minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg.

TRENDING

Stories

Videos

Your Say

Outside the Union premises, there were palpable signs of a society increasingly dismissive of the vitality of free speech.

Crowds of protesters gathered, chanting and attempting - and in some cases succeeding - to block access to the Oxford Union building so those wishing to engage could not even listen to the discussion.

Take a difficult topic such as this, and the important question is not "do we want this discussion?" - it is "why do we need this discussion?"

Yet, having sat through the debate, I left with a surprisingly optimistic conclusion. Far from demonstrating the dangers of free speech, the evening exemplified why free speech remains an indispensable component of a healthy nation, and that in a free society, the difficult questions do not disappear when they are silenced. They are resolved only when they are confronted.

Were there moments during the debate which felt uncomfortable? Of course. Mr Robinson raising the scandal of Britain's grooming gangs shame was, as ever, a difficult subject to hear about, along with countless other criticisms of Islam's place in British society. Mr al Andalusi was met with gasps when, to back up his point, he invoked statements made by the murderous terrorist Osama Bin Laden.

But why was the space to freely make these points so important?

In an era dominated by social media and a thirst for immediate reaction, genuine and drawn-out time for exchanging ideas is more important than ever. Online platforms provide a convenient and in many ways beneficial means of expressing and sharing opinions, but the risk has become increasingly clear in recent years: people very easily retreat into ideological sects and monotony in the information they consume, while very easily dismissing opposing viewpoints as illegitimate, with the benefit of being behind a screen making it much easier to be uncivil to those with whom the user disagrees.

The Oxford Union represents something different. It is one of the few places where people with fundamentally opposing views still meet face to face, present arguments, answer questions and submit themselves to scrutiny.

Oxford University is an institution that has led the world and made it a better place. Some 31 British Prime Ministers studied at Oxford, along with countless influential figures from the United States; world leaders from every corner of the globe; actors, writers, explorers, journalists, scientists, philosophers and clergymen, to name a few.

Since 1823, the Oxford Union has driven the institution's virtues even further, and it remains a bastion of why Western democracy succeeds.

The incumbent President, Arwa Elrayess, herself a Palestinian Muslim, has fought tooth and nail to make sure this debate could go ahead - she understands, as everyone involved in the society should, that platforming, challenging and debating your adversaries is the only way to ensure democracy is fit for purpose. She faced opposition from Union members, other groups within the University, Oxford City Council, and even the Church of England, which released a statement saying the event should be cancelled.

But she prevailed - as she, like the silent majority, knows that without free debate, democracy itself cannot function.

Without democracy, we will all be subjected to tyranny and risk losing the basic human liberties we perhaps take for granted.

Despite the shouts, the chants, and the endless efforts to quash last night's event, the silent, common sense majority fought on and again proved why free speech is right, fair and must be protected at all costs, otherwise all of us will lose.

Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter