Campus Review Vol 29. Issue 8 August 2019 | Page 4

news campusreview.com.au J ANU gig for Bishop Former foreign minister announced as the next ANU chancellor. Campus chaos UQ pro-Hong Kong protest turns ugly. T ensions over China’s controversial Hong Kong extradition law boiled over at one of Australia’s top universities, with pro-Hong Kong and pro-Chinese students clashing on the university’s market day. Nilsson Jones, editor of the university’s student magazine Semper Floreat, said an 2 ulie Bishop will become the first female chancellor of the Australian National University. The former foreign minister will take over from Gareth Evans – also an ex-parliamentarian – who has been chancellor since 2010. Bishop has taken on a number of positions, advisory and otherwise, since leaving parliament following her unsuccessful bid for the Liberal leadership earlier this year. In a letter to staff and students, pro-chancellor Naomi Flutter said Bishop has maintained a deep interest in education for most of her professional life. “The New Colombo Plan is one of her signature initiatives, aimed at lifting knowledge of the Indo-Pacific in Australia by supporting Australian undergraduates to study and undertake internships in the region.” In Bishop, Flutter said, ANU has a compelling and effective advocate, including with the Australian government. Bishop took to Twitter to say she was “delighted” to take on the role and looks forward to working closely with the university community. Flutter said forums about the chancellorship held with the ANU community highlighted the need for an “eminent, distinguished individual, befitting our university’s stature”. “It was clear you wanted someone who understands our distinctive role as the national university – contributing to matters of great national and international significance – and someone who appreciates the transformative power of universities, through their teaching and research. “In Julie, we have such a person.” Bishop’s three-year term will begin on 1 January next year. ■ estimated 150 pro-Hong Kong protesters were opposed by roughly 200 pro-Beijing students, with the latter ripping up signs showing support for Hong Kong and criticising China’s treatment of its Uyghur population. “There were signs saying ‘One million Muslims detained’, ‘Free Hong Kong’ and things like that. Tensions escalated when Chinese students arrived – there were students holding speakers and blasting the Chinese national anthem,” Jones told Guardian Australia. Jones took footage of the clashes, which reportedly started when a mainland supporter took a megaphone off a protester and threw it. The footage has since been shared on social media and triggered intense debate between pro- Hong Kong and pro-China supporters. The University of Queensland released a statement shortly after the incident stating that the safety of students was its paramount concern. It did not, however, explicitly condemn the violence. “One of the roles of universities is to enable open, respectful and lawful free speech, including debate about ideas we may not all support or agree with,” it said. “The university expects staff and students to express their views in a lawful and respectful manner, and in accordance with the policies and values of the university. “Earlier today, in response to safety concerns resulting from a student-initiated protest on campus, the university requested police support. “On the advice of police, protestors were requested to move on. “The safety of all students is paramount to the university. Any student requiring support should contact Student Services on 1300 851 998 or visit www.uq.edu.au/ student-services.” Many students have called for an investigation into the incident, concerned by what they see as a violation of “the Australian spirit … to respect freedom of speech”. The clashes at UQ follow weeks of unrest in Hong Kong. Hundreds of thousands of citizens have taken to the streets to protest a law that would allow Beijing to extradite Hong Kong residents to the mainland to stand trial. Pro-Hong Kong supporters see the law as a further incursion into their freedom of speech and political opinion. ■