Just as NZ began collecting meaningful data on rainbow communities, census changes threaten their visibility
Rainbow communities had been invisible in the census since its inception in 1851.
Photo:
AFP/ Allison Dinner
New Zealand's 2023 census
was the first to collect data
on gender identity and sexual orientation, showing one in 20 adults identify as LGBTQIA+.
But just as reports from this more inclusive census are being released, Minister of Statistics Shane Reti announced
a change to existing administrative data
collected by government departments as part of their normal business, scrapping a 150-year history of the census.
Currently, there are no sources of administrative data that include adequate rainbow demographic markers such as sexual orientation, gender, transgender experience or variations of sex characteristics.
Without high-quality data, the policy reforms needed to address underserved and historically marginalised populations become harder to make. How can we create evidence-based policy with no evidence?
The slogan of the 2023 census was "tatau tātou - all of us count".
Rainbow communities had been invisible in the census since its inception in 1851. The 2023 Census was a watershed moment, born out of decades of determined activism and advocacy from the community.
For us, as housing and homelessness researchers, it was particularly important to finally have whole-of-population data about
rates of homelessness among LGBTQIA+ communities
. Data on housing showed rainbow communities pay higher rents, live in mouldier housing and move more frequently than non-rainbow communities.
Adding LGBTQIA+ data to the census meant we were the first country in the world to have such data on the housing experiences of these communities. We were applauded internationally by colleagues who have long been wanting similar homelessness and rainbow data from their own national censuses.
This data will be a great advocacy tool, but it is bittersweet that we will never have such information again.
There is a nearly 50-year history of various community movements, from boycotts to activism, chronicling the queer struggle to be appropriately counted in the census.
In 1981, a group of Wellington lesbians held a "dykecott" of the New Zealand census to protest their exclusion. This included sending blank census forms to the Human Rights Commission with various explanations essentially saying "no rights, no responsibilities."
Then, in the 1990s, the Wellington City Council's lesbian and gay advisory group came together to lobby Stats NZ about the need for inclusive census data. In 1996, census forms were changed to be able to count same-sex partners.
In 2002, the former editor of the New Zealand LGBTQIA+ magazine Express Victor van Wetering went so far as to lodge a formal complaint against Stats NZ, stating the agency was in clear breach of the Human Rights Act. He alleged it was failing to meet its statutory requirements.
Advocacy continued throughout the 2000s and 2010s, and in 2018, Stats NZ released their statistical standards for measuring sexual orientation. The possibility of inclusive census data started to become more of a reality.
The decision to halt the census as we know it means there will be no longitudinal comparative data for rainbow communities. Just as the community has been allowed out of the statistical closet, people will be put back in.
It had long been argued that accuracy of rainbow data would improve over subsequent censuses. Now we will never know what developments might have emerged.
Community advocates and the Human Rights Commission continued to raise the lack of rainbow data collection at the population level.
In 2020, the Human Rights Commission released a report which found New Zealand's data collection processes fail to accurately count the country's rainbow community members.
Stats NZ had already started significant work to evaluate and update their sex and gender identity standards. Weeks after the report, the agency committed to what would become the 2023 census. Rainbow community groups applauded, felt finally listened to and called the shift a major win.
This sense of pride continues as reports and data are released from the census.
Research and survey data consistently show rainbow communities in Aotearoa New Zealand experience multiple forms of discrimination. This includes violence, family rejection, bullying and social exclusion.
These experiences contribute to disproportionately high rates of serious negative outcomes such as suicidality, health inequities, homelessness and substance use. Despite this, we continue to lack data comparing the experiences of rainbow communities with those of the general population.
As a result, health and social disparities affecting LGBTQIA+ people are systematically under-recognised in government strategies and across health and social service systems. Efforts to address these inequities are also frequently under-resourced and inadequately prioritised.
Former government statistician Len Cook said:
"There is no time over the past 50 years when the scope and quality of population statistics has been of such importance in public life in Aotearoa New Zealand as now."
Scrapping the census is a cost-cutting exercise. But what is the real cost of losing data and which communities will disproportionately bear this cost? The decision renders LGBTQIA+ people, once again, invisible.
This story was originally published on
The Conversation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Season 3 Episode 15: Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick on homelessness, energy poverty, Gaza, and electoral law changes
Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says National MPs she's spoken with want to support a stronger stance on sanctions against Israel but are too terrified to take on their party leadership. The sanctions are prompted by Israel's 22 month bombardment of Gaza and its refusal to allow aid to flow freely into the occupied region. Swarbrick lodged a member's bill in December and argues with all opposition parties backing it, the support of just six backbench government MPs would mean it could skip the "biscuit tin" ballot and be brought to Parliament for a first reading. She told Mata with Mihingarangi: "All we need is six of 68 government MPs to get it on the floor of the House ... I've spoken to a number of National MPs in particular and ... they're telling me, and look I'll be crystal clear about this, they're telling me that they're terrified about the future of their career because the indication that they've got from their leadership is that if they were to stick their neck out and do the right thing here they would be losing their place on the pecking order. "And my question, that I've put back to them is: What the hell is the point of your job?" Standing Order 288 allows MPs who are not ministers or under-secretaries to indicate their support for a member's bill. If at least 61 MPs get behind it, the legislation skips the "biscuit tin". If six government MPs indicated their support for this bill it would be the first time this process was followed. Late last month Foreign Minister Winston Peters called for a ceasefire in Gaza in a statement delivered in Parliament, but stopped short of promising further aid funding, or promising to join efforts to prevent weapons being sold to Israel. His speech coincided with New Zealand supporting a joint statement with 27 other countries calling for a ceasefire, and condemning the "drip-feeding of aid , and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children". A week later the coalition government signed an additional joint statement with 14 other countries expressing a willingness to recognise the State of Palestine as a necessary step towards a two-State solution. After 22 months of a devastating Israeli military campaign Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says there's a need for more than speeches and statements. "Gazans can't eat empty words, and this government has, for the better part of two years now, said that they're doing everything they can as they make statements and sit on their hands. "The very least that we could possibly do is apply the same standard that we did to Russia for its unlawful invasions into and occupation of Ukraine. "That's why we drafted the Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions bill which, after a year plus of waiting for the government to do something we put into the biscuit tin to remove any of the excuses. "The other important thing to note about the process we initiated by putting this into the biscuit tin is that we no longer need Winston Peters, Christopher Luxon or that other guy. We just need six of 68 government MPs to say that they are willing to stand by their conscience and do the right thing in the face of a genocide being live streamed to each of us 24/7 on our phones."

RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Treasury briefing points finger at government spending during Covid-19 pandemic
The Treasury briefing said the Covid-19 response showed the challenges of using fiscal policy to respond to shocks and cycles. Photo: FANATIC STUDIO / SCIENCE PHOTO L The previous government spent too much during the Covid-19 pandemic, despite warnings from officials, according to a briefing released by the Treasury. The Treasury's 2025 Long Term Insights Briefing said debt had risen in recent decades, partly because responses to adverse shocks were not met by savings between those shocks. The higher debt meant less capacity to respond to future shocks, like natural hazards, weather-related risks and biosecurity risks. Treasury estimated the total cost of the pandemic was $66 billion over the 2020-26 financial years and about 20.4 percent of GDP. The IMF and OECD estimated it was among the largest Covid-19 responses globally. The agency releases a briefing every three years, with this one looking at the role of fiscal policy through shocks and business cycles. The briefing said the Covid-19 response showed the challenges of using fiscal policy to respond to shocks and cycles. Initially, Treasury recommended "strong fiscal stimulus" at the start of the pandemic, which was cited as "perhaps" causing the economy to be much stronger than expected by the end of 2020. The wage-subsidy scheme in particular was seen as making an important contribution to the strong initial recovery, limiting the increase in the unemployment rate and enabling economic activity to resume when restrictions relaxed. Treasury then moved away from recommending broad-based stimulus, preferring more targeted and moderate support. Its post-election advice to the then-Finance Minister in late 2020 highlighted "the importance of controlling ongoing spending and ensuring it was high value to meet the medium-term fiscal challenge." By August 2021, with the Delta lockdowns coming in, Treasury recommended any decisions to provide support to businesses "should take account of macroeconomic trade-offs". It recommended against any further stimulus from Budget 2022 onwards. Wage subsidies and similar schemes during lockdowns made up about 35 percent of the costs of the response. A further 18 percent came from health-system costs, like vaccination, contact tracing, and managed isolation and quarantine. The remaining "nearly half" was made up of a wide range of initiatives that Treasury said had "varied objectives". Some were aimed at directly responding to the impacts of Covid-19, others were aimed at providing fiscal stimulus or "achieving social or environmental objectives". They included "tax changes, training schemes, housing construction, shovel-ready infrastructure projects, increases to welfare benefits, the Small Business Cashflow Scheme, Jobs for Nature, additional public housing places and school lunches". Programmes within the fiscal response that were not tied to the shock were seen as having "a lagged impact on the economy and proved difficult to unwind in later years". The report suggested cyclical management was best left to monetary policy, run by an independent central bank. It also suggested governments set out clearly when fiscal policy will be used ahead of time, including pre-defining responses. Ideally, this would have cross-party agreement. An independent fiscal institution, which could scrutinise and report on the sustainability of fiscal policy, was also suggested. The previous government had considered setting up a watchdog to cost election policies, but it could not get cross-party support. National then changed its tune, with current Finance Minister Nicola Willis supporting such a measure, but New Zealand First and ACT were opposed to the idea. Willis jumped on the report's release, saying Treasury's language was "spare and polite", but its conclusions were "damning". She said the briefing showed the challenges of using "big spending measures" to respond to one-off shocks. Willis singled out the briefing's focus on the money spent on initiatives not directly tied to the Covid-19 response. "That is a very diplomatic way of saying New Zealanders are still paying the price of the previous government extending a big-spending approach, initially intended for a pandemic response," she said. RNZ has approached Labour for comment. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Review ordered into product labels
The government has officially labelled product labels a problem and ordered a review. It said we currently have 30 codes, standards and regulations, and that is too many, with the current requirements costly, frustrating, complex and outdated. Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Scott Simpson spoke to Lisa Owen. To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.