The true cost of silence in the pursuit of truth
By Graeme Gordon: A “Fault Lines” report for The Hub, published on February 25, 2026
In Brief by Rights Probe
What was intended as a bold move to protect open dialogue has instead revealed a tangled web of complaints, self-censorship, and a lack of meaningful enforcement.
In its exploration of the state of free speech in Ontario’s post-secondary institutions, a “Fault Lines” report for The Hub delves into the promises made by Premier Doug Ford and the stark reality that has unfolded since the introduction of mandated free speech policies in 2019.
Since the policy's inception, a mere 97 complaints have been recorded, with fewer than 10 escalating to the Ontario Ombudsman, who lacks any real power to enforce compliance, notes The Hub. Critics, including free speech experts, argue that the Ford government’s initiative is little more than a façade, lacking the teeth necessary to effect meaningful change.
“It’s already evident that the Ford government stuff actually didn’t have any real bite to it,” University of Buckingham political science professor Eric Kaufmann told The Hub, highlighting the ineffectiveness of a system that relies on self-reporting and voluntary compliance.
The backdrop to this controversy includes high-profile incidents like the Jordan Peterson saga and the Lindsey Shepherd case, which ignited a firestorm of debate over free speech and academic freedom. In response, Ford’s government mandated that universities adopt policies based on the Chicago Principles, promising to protect free expression. The reality is students self-censor for fear of backlash.
In a bold exposé, Queen’s University law professor Bruce Pardy pulled back the curtain on the state of free speech at Canadian universities in a 2020 paper for the Education and Law Journal. He found the Ford government’s free speech policies were nothing but a charade. “Government directives that cannot be enforced are of little value,” he asserts, highlighting that these policies merely outline a political process rather than a legal one.
Pardy delivered a grim picture of campus life and the true cost of silence in the pursuit of truth, where students are increasingly self-censoring their thoughts on sensitive topics like race theory and gender issues. As the administration turns a blind eye to dissent, “Students regularly tell me they cannot risk saying what they really think in class, for fear of backlash from teachers or their classmates,” he said.
The situation is further complicated by the introduction of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) policies, which critics argue conflict with free speech initiatives by prioritizing certain beliefs over others.
This ideological dogma, says The Hub, has created an environment where self-censorship thrives, leading to a chilling effect on academic discourse and research that extends to faculty and staff. The Hub once more cites Eric Kaufmann, who says professors are increasingly self-censoring to avoid conflict. The consequences of speaking out aren’t always official, he said. Instead, they manifest as informal political prejudice, where dissenting voices are quietly sidelined through missed promotions, denied grants, or even social ostracism. The throttling of free speech will ultimately lead to poor policy and governance, he warns.
As the walls of academic freedom close in, the stakes have never been higher for those brave enough to challenge the status quo—a situation that raises critical questions about the pressures of ideological conformity and its polarizing effects on society.
Go to the publisher’s website here to read the report in full.
The first of a two-part series looking at free speech on Ontario university campuses since Premier Doug Ford mandated post-secondary institutions enforce free speech policies on campuses nearly a decade ago. Part two will look at the self-censorship and punishments that students and professors who speak against progressive orthodoxy face.
