Community Engagement Report for developing a National Action Plan Against Racism Some participants urged care in the way data was framed, noting that ethnicity data is often presented in a deficit-based way: Our people are always described within data with deficit framing and language – the 4Ds. Overcrowding in housing [for example] is always seen as a negative thing, but this doesn’t recognise that we live communally and intergenerationally. The narrative is always negative. Participants identified data gaps around ethnicity and noted racial discrimination meant it was difficult to track whether any progress had been made or whether any interventions had improved equity outcomes. Having good quality data was essential to their vision showing similar outcomes for all ethnic groups living in Aotearoa: “no disparity means everyone has a fair go.” A consistent theme raised by participants was the need for the government to make legislative and policy changes. Many participants said that it is the government’s responsibility to eliminate systemic racism and that it needs to be mandated: “it’s seen as a nice to have [which] allows for racism to thrive.” Participants who worked in government acknowledged the need for this responsibility: If there is an adverse outcome from our policy development, we [government agencies] should own it. The standard needs to be higher for ourselves being in a privileged position – we need to own it. Participants wanted to see “policymakers systematically and effectively integrate diverse voices in policymaking to meet the needs and aspirations of the communities the policies are designed to serve.” This also means that government agencies need to consider who is working for them: New Zealand Human Rights Commission they need to be courageous in recruiting and retaining staff who hold expert knowledge and different ethnic viewpoints – and listening to their knowledge when formulating policy, operational expectations and legislation. Participants highlighted how current legislation and policy perpetuated racism: institutional reform was needed together with monitoring and accountability measures to effect meaningful change, as “absence of accountability allows for racism to continue.” Others agreed and provided a vision where “all systems and institutions would be free from racism … and have internal and externally moderated processes for monitoring progress to ensure fair inputs, experiences and outcomes for all.” Other countries provided some examples Aotearoa could look to: “Canada has racism-free policies, and we should learn and adopt accordingly”; another mentioned the European Union’s Race Equality Directive. Some participants noted the need for incentives, with the example of needing “certain competencies to be on the board” and “ensuring that competencies are embedded from the top down in an organisation’s strategy and framework”. Another underlined the urgency of taking a broader view: we need more than [anti-racism policies]. We operate on a structure underpinned by whiteness – a structure that is founded on whiteness. If we don’t fix the system, it will break our people. 73