Pitched as a return to "one person, one vote, and the same rules for everyone," ACT wants ethnicity removed as a factor in how the state funds and delivers public services, putting need ahead of race or Treaty status.

The Policy: ACT Equal Rights and Democracy — 2023 Election →

_Neutrality note: this is a constitutionally contested area. The positions below are attributed to the people who hold them; figures are sourced; the entry takes no side on the underlying debate._

What it does:

• ACT's platform commits to "eliminate race-based policies across all areas of Government" and to challenge arrangements it says divide New Zealanders by ethnicity, alongside a push to "define the Treaty principles" and end co-governance in resource management and local services.
• In office as a coalition partner, ACT secured a Cabinet Office circular — announced by Public Service Minister Nicola Willis on 13 September 2024 — directing agencies to base targeting "on the needs of all New Zealanders" and to make a "strong analytical case" before using ethnicity as a proxy for need.
• The same package scrapped Labour's progressive procurement target that asked agencies to direct 8% of contracts to Maori-owned businesses, replacing it with a "public value" test.
• As Associate Health Minister, David Seymour instructed Pharmac in July 2024 to stop weighting the Treaty of Waitangi in funding decisions; Pharmac later disestablished its Maori advisory group.
• Related coalition moves ACT counts toward the same goal: the Maori Health Authority Te Aka Whai Ora was disestablished on 30 June 2024, and section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act was repealed so that, in the Government's words, "child wellbeing" rather than whakapapa drives care decisions.
• Bowel-cancer screening was lowered to age 58 for everyone using money that had funded an earlier start age of 50 for Maori and Pacific people — which ACT lists as ending a race-based eligibility rule.

The result: Many individual pieces have been delivered, but ACT's stated end-goal — removing race-based criteria "across all areas of Government" — remains a continuing agenda rather than a finished one, so the overall pledge sits in progress. ACT leader David Seymour argues the state should serve people "based on actual need, without assigning their background as a proxy of need," and Nicola Willis frames the circular as fair, evidence-led targeting. Critics dispute both the premise and the process. Labour health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall says decades of data show ethnicity is itself a real driver of unequal access; Green MP Francisco Hernandez called the public-service directive a "dog-whistle"; and Te Pati Maori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer argued need and ethnicity are inseparable for Maori and Pacific communities. The Waitangi Tribunal found the section 7AA repeal "rushed and arbitrary" with a "significant risk of actual harm." On bowel screening, Dr Nina Scott of Maori cancer network Hei Ahuru Mowai called raising the start age for Maori and Pacific people a form of "institutionalised racism," while the Ministry of Health argued the universal age-58 setting would prevent more cancers overall.

The impacts to watch:

• Whether removing ethnicity-targeted programmes narrows or widens documented health gaps — Pacific people face a 63% higher bowel-cancer mortality rate than non-Maori non-Pacific New Zealanders, and around 30% of bowel cancers in Maori women occur before age 50.
• Legal and Tiriti exposure: the Waitangi Tribunal has already ruled against parts of the agenda, and further claims or judicial review are possible as more changes land.
• How far the "need, not race" test reshapes everyday agency practice, given the circular still allows ethnicity-based targeting where a strong evidence case exists.
• Whether the broader, unlegislated commitments — defining the Treaty principles and ending co-governance — advance, stall, or are dropped as coalition priorities shift toward the 2026 election.