Summarised by Centrist
Associate Professor Anaru Eketone argues Winston Peters’ bill targets affirmative action, which he says is still needed for fair representation.
He challenges merit-based hiring as too narrow, asserting that underrepresented groups bring “extra skills, knowledge, networks and life experience.”
Citing Otago Medical School, he supports redefining merit, noting that, “just because you get good marks doesn’t mean you will be a good doctor.”
While acknowledging affirmative action was meant to be temporary, he warns that ending it too soon could undo progress.
Editor’s note: It may be that criteria for a profession should be expanded but shouldn’t the same criteria still be used for all applicants? While Eketone insists affirmative action was always meant to be temporary, he offers no threshold for success, no measurable outcome, and no conditions under which it should be phased out.
Eketone also claims that rejecting “wokeness” means rejecting justice, yet he fails to engage with why ‘woke’ policies have become contentious in the first place. Is the pushback against diversity quotas really about discrimination—or are people simply asking why identity should trump ability?
If race-based hiring isn’t about lowering standards, then why refuse to define what merit is?
