Dialogue: Action not complaints will advance cultural harmony

New Zealand is a diverse society, writes Race Relations Conciliator GREGORY FORTUIN, so we should see that diversity as an advantage, not a problem.

In its first year 30 years ago, the Race Relations Office dealt with 92 complaints. Last year that number increased to 1100 and this year it is heading towards 1400.

I could spend the rest of my time as Race Relations Conciliator looking at best practices in dealing reactively with complaints. But it is clear that more energy could be put into addressing systemic issues.

A number of issues that could be advanced have been identified from the complaints process.

There is the relationship with tangata whenua, which manifests itself in matters concerning the Treaty of Waitangi and affirmative action. The re-evaluation team looking at the relationship between the Race Relations Office and an overall human rights culture identified this issue as needing urgent attention.

The number of complaints received by the office reflect broader public concern. While there are clear indications that some complaints reflect conservative opinion, there is also a lack of understanding of the treaty's place in New Zealand's constitutional framework.

The matter has been further muddled by the settling of treaty breaches, which has unfortunately been confused for honouring the treaty itself.

The phones in the Race Relations Office light up like a Christmas tree on issues concerning Maori, such as in the areas of health (the complaints division dealt with a bundle of hepatitis B complaints recently), tertiary education (scholarships, grants and so on) and even cultural events.

We have complaints against several city councils for daring to refer to the treaty in their strategic plans.

Until such time as we work out how, in a meaningful way, we honour our founding document in a 21st century democracy, the complaints will continue to flood my office. We will continue to be reactive.

In spite of the voices that keep telling us that this country is not ready to face this difficult and vexed issue, I suggest that on these sorts of matters, no country is ever ready. What it will take is intestinal fortitude to ensure we vigorously, but respectfully and constructively, put all the matters on the table and work towards a collective vision. If, on the other hand, you are going nowhere, any road will get you there.

A second issue is our diversity and the changing demographic profile. Through immigration and refugee resettlement policies, we are drastically altering that profile.

This means that more than ever there is a need for New Zealanders to understand and appreciate the value of diversity. Diversity is integral to an inclusive society and only by fully appreciating its benefits will people feel less threatened.

As an organisation that is dedicated to a fair and just society, with equal opportunity for all irrespective of race, colour or country of origin, the Race Relations Office has an important role to play in public education designed to achieve this end.

Discussions with new immigrants, ethnic communities and refugee organisations highlight significant hardship. While some can be attributed to the expected difficulties of settling in a new country, others reflect a lack of cultural sensitivity.

The issue of employment is significant. The office receives frequent complaints of discrimination, particularly from recent immigrants who consider they have been treated badly by employers or fellow employees, or because of non-recognition of overseas qualifications or experience.

While this type of complaint is greatest in the case of overseas-trained doctors, the complaints cover a wide spectrum of employment.

Diversity recognises, respects and values individual differences so all people can maximise their own potential and that of the society in which they live.

Over the past 10 years it has become abundantly clear that workplace diversity is a competitive necessity. The world of business has become increasingly globalised and our demographic profile is becoming increasingly diverse.

It would be economically naive to ignore the enormous economic clout of many of the ethnic minorities. A company that ignores these new affluent markets will lose a huge competitive edge.

If a company has a diverse workforce, it can respond more effectively to the needs of its diverse customers. Customers feel far more comfortable doing business with people who speak their language (so to speak) and understand their cultures and values, rather than with companies that don't.

It is also important that diversity extends to all levels of the company - not just to customer services and sales but also product design and marketing.

This helps avoid the disaster that befell Chevrolet when it launched a car called the Nova into Latin America. If it had a Hispanic member on the team, it would have known Nova means "don't go" in Spanish.

However, don't assume that one size fits all. Just because someone is of a certain ethnicity, don't automatically put him or her in a box.

Another example would be of a young black man who appeared before a judge in Britain having committed terrible crimes. After finding him guilty, the judge asked, "Can this man be deported?" only to be told the man was a fourth-generation British subject.

A third issue is disadvantage and disparity. While this in isolation does not bedevil good race relations, the fact that it is happening in poor regions and is more represented in specific ethnic groups should not be taken lightly.

The recent race riots in Oldham, Britain, were a clear example of this. I am not saying we will have an Oldham tomorrow, but if particular ethnic groups are frustrated by disadvantage, the potential for hitting out in anger should not be taken lightly. Beware when poverty has an ethnicity.

What can we collectively do?

We must have credible measures to establish benchmarks and track how we are going.

My office has just started a project to research the methodologies and measures of other international institutions, especially those of the European Monitoring Institution and Canada. It is critical that we have qualitative and credible measures to plot progress.

On the issue of diversity, we are collaborating with a number of agencies, institutions, organisations and sectors.

On the question of disadvantage and disparity in poor regions, I am talking to agencies such as Industry New Zealand and the Ministry of Economic Development.

On the issue of our relationship with tangata whenua, we must proceed with sensitivity and caution.

But unless we clarify and clearly articulate this special relationship (and preferably not through the more than 30 pieces of legislation that merely refer to the treaty), my office is forever going to be reactive in dealing with complaints, as opposed to proactively focusing on nation-building.

We cannot rewrite history but we can shape the future. The past is never gone, it pervades who we are in the future.

The past not dealt with will forever hang like an oppressive cloud until we look the beast in the eye.