Sorry.
I'd say it is a very odd time to be discussing whether the man who led us to victory in the war was less than perfect. Of course he was flawed, but in a time when we need hope and promise for the future, having a go at a great British leader is not needed.
I also question by what means they are going to "critically re-assess" him. If that is using current standards, he will of course fail... better to be proud of his achievements and be pleased that your College is named after him, for those parts.
The quoted people also already seem to be having a go at him:
' “there are a great many people who will hear no ill of Churchill but also a great many, not just outside but also within Britain, who feel anything from criticism to deep revulsion at the figure of Churchill. Whatever our views on that we are obliged to ask why.” She said that some in the world saw him as monstrous and problematic" '
... which means they have already decided the outcome!