The University of Otago has rejected claims that Vice-Chancellor Grant Robertson breached institutional neutrality requirements by criticising a controversial bill defining “woman” and “man” in law.

The Free Speech Union accused Robertson of taking an institutional position on a contested political issue after he expressed personal opposition to the Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill in an email to students.

The Members’ Bill, introduced by NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft, passed its first reading in Parliament on May 20 and is now before a select committee.

It seeks to define “women” in law as an “adult human biological female” and “man” defined as an “adult human biological male”.

The bill has generated significant debate over its implications for transgender, intersex and non-binary New Zealanders.

Otago University vice-chancellor Grant Robertson.

In a recent email to the university community, Robertson addressed the legislation while discussing student wellbeing and support services ahead of exams.

“I know this Bill will be upsetting for many in our Otago community - particularly those who identify as, and love and support our trans, intersex, takatāpui, gender diverse and non-binary whānau,” Robertson wrote.

“At a personal level, I find this legislation to be unnecessary and disturbing.”

He added that “as a university we remain resolute in upholding our commitments to respect and inclusion”, and directed students to support services including Student Health and Te Pou Whirinaki.

The email also referenced Budget 2026, with Robertson writing that while there were some positives for universities, it was “overall a lean budget for our sector” and that “the Budget seeks to shift even more of the burden of the cost of education in the future on to you”.

Responding to questions from the Herald, a University of Otago spokesperson said the email was one of Robertson’s regular messages to students and was intended to support their wellbeing during the examination period.

“The topic was about student wellbeing with the intention of outlining the various support available to Otago students – including Te Pou Whirinaki (the Wellbeing Hub), Student Health, and Pūtea Tautoko (the Student Relief Fund) – as they navigate the upcoming exam period, along with political developments which may, or may not, impact them.”

The Members Bill was introduced by NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft.

The university rejected suggestions that the email amounted to an institutional position on the bill.

“The text clearly states the view is a personal one. It is clearly separated from the position of the university in supporting the wellbeing of students.”

The spokesperson said the university’s Statement on Free Speech encouraged tolerance of differing views and debate conducted in good faith.

“It also encourages debate in good faith guided by the principles of manaakitaka (care and respect for others), enabling each of us to act as critics and conscience of society.”

The university also pointed to its Statement on Institutional Neutrality, which states the university will not communicate institutional positions on controversial topics unless they directly affect the university’s role or functions.

“Examples of such functions include the safety and wellbeing of students, financial and regulatory concerns, sustainability, equity, ethical investment and obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

“The University is deeply committed to supporting the wellbeing of our staff and students and upholding our commitments to respect and inclusion, our Equity and Diversity Framework, our responsibilities under human rights legislation, and for students, the statutory obligations under the Pastoral Care Code.”

Asked whether any formal complaints had been received, the university said: “As far as we can ascertain, the University has received one email complaining about the Vice-Chancellor’s email.”

The Free Speech Union said it was concerned about the communication and would write to the chair of the University of Otago Council seeking clarification over what steps would be taken in response.

In a recent email to the university community, Robertson addressed the bill while discussing student wellbeing and support services ahead of exams. Image / Supplied

Free Speech Union stakeholder relationships manager Steph Martin said the organisation’s concern was not with Robertson providing support to students.

“Supporting students who feel affected by a Bill is part of his role, and we have no problem with that,” Martin said.

“The issue is taking an institutional position on a strongly contested political question. When the Vice-Chancellor signs his views with his title and sends them through the University’s own channels, the institution speaks with him - and staff and students who take a different view are left on the wrong side of an official line.”

Martin said institutional neutrality existed to protect academic freedom.

“A university stays open by not announcing, from the chair, which side of a contested question its members should be on,” she said.

The union pointed to the University of Otago’s Statement on Free Speech, adopted in 2024, and legislative changes made last year requiring universities to adopt freedom of expression statements incorporating principles of institutional neutrality.

“We take no position on the merits of the Bill or the Budget,” Martin said.

“Reasonable New Zealanders will hold a range of perspectives on both, including at Otago. The point is that a university should be a place where they can disagree - including with their Vice-Chancellor.”

The Free Speech Union said it understood at least one student had already raised a formal concern over the email and that it intended to seek further information through an Official Information Act request.

Robertson, a former deputy prime minister and finance minister, became vice-chancellor of the University of Otago in July 2024.

Submissions on the bill close on July 2.

Ben Tomsett is a multimedia journalist based in Dunedin. He joined the Herald in 2023.