Amplifying Ethnic Voices: Navigating the Age of Misinformation with Inclusivity and Diversity - What politicians can learn from the judiciary

It’s that time of the triennial electoral cycle when ethnic communities traditionally receive renewed attention and affection from politicians.

But despite being in Government, the Labour party appears to have been seemingly red-flagged and hesitant to participate in ethnic community events - particularly those involving the Chinese and Indian communities.

The National Party on the other hand has consistently engaged with various ethnic communities while in opposition, particularly the Indian and Chinese communities. This has allowed them to address a range of issues related to the economy, infrastructure and law and order, almost assuming a government’s role.

Property-related

Having attended the recent annual gala dinner of the Chinese building association in Auckland, I believe Prime Minister Chris Hipkins made the right decision of declining the association’s invitation. The other Chris, Mr Luxon, the Leader of the Opposition, unsurprisingly attended and enjoyed it. Mr Luxon spoke after Minister David Parker. To the 900-strong audience, no matter what Luxon said he was greeted with cheers and applauses. Minister Parker, however, did not enjoy the same luck. In his speech and despite his manifested passion in reforming the resources management laws and carefully worded lines for targeted audience such as “the issues added to your costs” etc – all you heard was largely a rhythmic clinking and scraping sound as the guests were enjoying their meals.

Immigration

Over the last months, if not years, the Labour Government appeared to have adopted a default position of not making any decisions concerning immigration. Given most of the decision-making powers regarding appeals or special approvals are delegated to the associate immigration minister, the secret recipe of the government seemed to avoid decision-making by changing the decision makers. Given the rapid and unpredictable fluctuations in appointing and replacing the associate ministers, it is difficult to keep an accurate count of the numbers and names of those (non)decision-makers.

Multiculturalism

As the general election approaches, all parties must allocate more time to engage with these communities, acknowledging New Zealand’s multiculturalism and striving for diversity, inclusivity, and representation.

To accomplish this, the new government should avoid patronising attitudes and tokenism.?

Embracing multiculturalism involves genuinely considering migrants as part of the nation, refraining from treating them as second-class citizens or scapegoats for (geo)political or economic failures.

Singapore & Ireland as example

New Zealand could strive to become a hub for talent and investment, like

Singapore or Ireland, contributing to our badly needed infrastructure and national development.

Tokenism, which superficially includes diverse individuals, must be avoided, focusing instead on merit and skills. The new government can enrich its agenda-setting and decision-making process by casting a wider net to bring fresh perspectives and skills to the table.

Learn from the judiciary!

To initiate change, the new government, the ethnic portfolio minister, and all MPs can learn from the judiciary, exemplified by our Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Deng v Zheng.

This case – believed to be the first of its kind in the common law jurisdictions – provided timely judicial guidance for how to navigate different cultural aspects.

This case involving Mandarin Chinese interactions highlighted the need to understand cultural nuances. Language was used in a broader linguistic and business cultural setting where the meaning to be ascribed to gōngsī might go beyond “company” and could extend to “firm” and “enterprise”.

Guānxi, or personal relationships, social capital or networking, might result in a particular way of doing business including, for example, a tendency to rely on the trusts arising from interpersonal connections as opposed to formal written agreements which might be perceived as “distrusting”.

The Supreme Court’s judgement exemplifies the heightened realisation within an ever-more culturally and linguistically diverse New Zealand that it is vital to promote both understanding and empathy while dismantling stereotypes and biases.

New Kiwis

It’s worth noting that the leading lawyers in this case were young Chinese-born individuals whose career-development was influenced and supported by previous and successful immigration policies.

Under both Clark and Key/English governments, there were clear pathways that allowed and encouraged prospective migrants, including New Zealand-educated international students, to get residence once meeting the eligibility criteria. Under the current Labour Government, there were no such clear pathways.

The triennial attention from politicians would certainly create a feel-good experience. It also provides an opportunity to assess and shape policies in New Zealand’s best interests.