The need for shared understandings Participants shared their concerns that there is little consensus on other key terminology often operationalised in relation to anti-racism. This includes the term ‘social cohesion’. Social cohesion is an ambiguous term often used in policy discourse to refer to the unification of diverse cultural groups through a national identity. 15 Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah, argues that this national identity is primarily based on traditional white-Australian values. Her view is that, as a result, social cohesion has been the driver behind assimilationist policies and practices.16 Social cohesion, interpreted in this manner, conflicts with anti-racism principles, as evidenced by arguments made by participants in the National Anti-Racism Framework initial scoping process. Participants said that the language of anti-racism and social inclusion needs to be more transparent and should be determined by consensus according to human rights approaches upholding participation and representation. Participants shared their feedback that clarity was needed regarding the use of the terms ‘equity’ and ‘equality’ in relation to a national anti-racism framework. [We] need to clearly define equality vs equity before moving forward with any other discussion around racism and its effects on different cohorts of people. — consultation with migrant focused community organisation, NARF project, May 2021 – April 2022 [W]e witness the goal of the AHRC’s conceptualisation of anti-racism as one of working toward ‘equal rights’ yet, for Indigenous peoples, the emancipatory goal is one that recognises and protects their ‘unique rights’. — submission from Prof Chelsea Watego and Dr David Singh, NARF project, May 2021 – April 2022 Racial equality is often understood as formal equality, referring to the equal treatment of individuals and groups regardless of racial difference, whereas equity, like substantive equality, recognises the needs and strengths of diverse communities and individuals, and that varying treatment is required to ameliorate disadvantage and ensure equal opportunities and outcomes. While ‘equality’ in Australian and international law and jurisprudence means substantive equality, this is often not the way it is understood by those making laws, policies, and programs. Participants also conveyed the importance of recognising the distinct unique and collective right of First Nations peoples and their goals in that regard. Formal racial equality was seen as undermining First Nations peoples’ unique and collective rights by presenting the solutions to the unique concerns of First Nations peoples as identical to all culturally and linguistically diverse groups in Australia. Similarly, ambiguity around ‘multiculturalism’ and its conflation with anti-racism was seen to detract from and obfuscate genuinely anti-racist aspirations and activities. National Anti-Racism Framework Scoping Report 2022 | 57