Here’s a seriously dodgy publication put out recently by the Human Rights Commission: Drivers of Migrant New Zealanders experiences of racism
From its forward, Meng Foon writes:
Findings from Stats NZ’s General Social Survey indicate that people born outside of Aotearoa report higher rates of discrimination compared with those born in Aotearoa (16.5% for those born in Aotearoa compared with 18.8% for the long-term migrants and 21.2% for recent migrants in 2018)
The key finding of the report was:
Racism is prevalent in Aotearoa New Zealand:
Participants’ experiences of racism consisted of institutional, personally mediated and internalised racism across all levels of wellbeing: civic engagement and governance, health, housing, employment, society and social connections, education and the justice system. Findings emphasised that the ongoing impact of historical and contemporary racism toward Māori remained embedded within colonial systems and institutions and extended to tauiwi populations as well as Tangata whenua.
Grim stuff indeed.
The report then goes into 114 pages of rhetoric around why “white” New Zealanders are generally bad people.
Participants in the process (Maori, non-Maori New Zealander, and Migrant) identified numerous drivers for migrants’ experiences of racism. From pages 71 to 78, these were:
- Colonisation: Participants commonly noted and empathised with Māori about the negative impact of colonisation on Māori as Indigenous to Aotearoa and saw connections to the impacts of colonisation in their own heritage.
- Fear: Participants described racism as a way to maintain power and control over others. Many thought this emanated from a sense of fear of the unknown among dominant groups and a perceived loss of opportunities (e.g. employment), power and control.
- Ignorance: of cultural awareness and willingness to change; of self-awareness, empathy and emotional intelligence, of what it means to be a ‘Kiwi’ and ‘Kiwi culture’, of an ability to think critically.
- Looking for someone to blame: Many participants noted historical and contemporary examples of dominant groups looking for someone else to blame for issues within societies.
- White privilege: European tauiwi [migrants] commonly acknowledged differences and white privilege compared with other tauiwi [migrant] populations in Aotearoa New Zealand.
- Limited response to racism in Aotearoa New Zealand: Some participants highlighted denial and deflection about racism from governing bodies and political leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand as contributing factors for racism.
- Racial supremacy: Participants described racial supremacy as a belief held by some that their own ethnic group was better than others.
- Eurocentricity and Western ideologies: Maintaining social networks and identifying more with those who are familiar and similar were described by some participants as being natural human traits.
…
in line with the notion of Eurocentricity, Western ideologies of dominant ethnic groups were considered a driver for racism against people who look different, or who have different beliefs, cultural expressions, and English language proficiency. - Child development and role-modelling racist behaviours: Modelling racist behaviours and beliefs to children as well as internalised racist impacts was considered a way of reproducing intergenerational racism and trauma.
- People seen only as social and economic capital: Participants commonly noted that individuals and groups of people can be judged by their perceived economic value and seen as either financial contributors or liabilities.
- Negative bias and inaccurate stereotyping and attention: Deficit-focused and negative stereotypes, messaging and media coverage about Māori and tauiwi communities were considered major drivers for racism in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Hang on… lets go back to the evidence…
However, the published GSS data is here https://www.stats.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Well-being-statistics/Well-being-statistics-2018/Download-data/wellbeing-statistics-2018.xlsx, Table 11 (Migrant status).
Once the reported Absolute Sampling Error are included with the estimates for the percentage of people experiencing discrimination for each of the groups, all of the confidence band estimates overlap.
Once statistical survey error is considered, none of migrant or non-migrant group experiences of discrimination differ. Consequently the GSS DOES NOT say migrant discrimination experience differs from the experience of those born in New Zealand:
| Measure | Total population | Born in NZ | Long – term migrant | Recent migrant |
| Estimate (Percent) | 17.4 | 16.5 | 18.8 | 21.2 |
| Absolute Sampling Error (Percentage Points) | 1.0 | 1.3 | 2.2 | 4.5 |
| Lowest estimate (95% CI) | 16.4 | 15.2 | 16.6 | 16.7 |
| Highest estimate (95% CI) | 18.4 | 17.8 | 21.0 | 25.7 |
Statistically, the percentage of migrant people experiencing discrimination is the same as the percentage of people born in New Zealand
But, judging from the findings cited above, this wasn’t really a report about migrants to New Zealand, was it HRC?