Why It’s Time To Let Go Of Representation Politics In The Charity Sector
Shaan Sangha has been involved in the charity sector since her first volunteering role helped her see how, at their best, charities can support people through some of the most challenging times in their lives. Now, 11 years and an MA later, she explores whether or not the charity sector can grow beyond its origins, beyond support, and drive meaningful social change.
If there is a conversation about structural racism, a discussion about representation is never too far behind. It’s often brought forward as the solution to our troubles- as though everything could be solved if only the people in power look like us.
But we had a government that looked like us, which didn’t work well. We have just seen one of the most ethnically diverse governments, including the first Indian Prime Minister, advocate for policy after policy that limited the rights of racially marginalised people and migrants in the UK. We’ve also recently seen the appointment of the first Black Woman, Kemi Badenoch, as Leader of the Conservative Party, who denies the significance of colonialism.
While many praise Sunak's legacy and Badenoch's appointment, why is this the limitation of our dreams, and is diversity enough? Unfortunately, this dream of diversity is not enough. We thought that having people in government who look like us automatically meant they would look out for us, and this has been proven profoundly untrue. We can’t pretend the meaning of representation hasn’t changed.
What did Representation mean?
Representation used to mean change. The headlines that tell you the first (ENTER MINORITISED DEMOGRAPHIC HERE) had just been hired as [POSITION OF POWER] made us feel hopeful for the future. Racialised people who have been appointed to positions of power were thought to be people who would bring us with them, bring our perspective into key rooms of power, and make it easier for those who would come after. It was a clear marker of success and change that so many worked for, finally coming to fruition.
[Image description: Two Black women in orange hijabs and yellow tunics with white stars. The woman on the left has an "X" over her mouth, while the woman on the right is smiling, with speech bubbles filled with scribbles around her.]
It's important to understand here that representation can be divided into Descriptive and Substantive.
Descriptive is when they look like you, and that's as far as the representation goes. For example, I’m an Indian woman, so an Indian woman MP would be a great descriptive representation for me.
Substantive representation is when they represent your interests. For example, a White male MP who looks nothing like me but can advocate for my views in parliament would be a substantive representation.
We used to think of Descriptive and Substantive as somewhat entwined. That’s why we thought things would change when racialised people took up positions of power.
Instead, we had one of the most visibly diverse cabinets in the history of UK politics successfully advance a white supremacist agenda by passing a slew of new laws that disproportionately affect racially marginalised people.
This was not a coincidence—it was a strategy employed to change the face of the Conservative Party while keeping its aims and ideas exactly the same. While the party's cabinet changed by parachuting what they refer to as “BAME MPs” into safe seats and promoting them to top roles, the broader makeup of the Conservatives barely changed at all. They created a facade of “BAME MPs” to hide behind.
And it has been a very effective strategy in several ways:
Racially Marginalised people are included in elitism, even while it corrodes their rights. The Conservative cabinet created the illusion that anyone can succeed and even become Prime Minister- irrespective of background. ‘Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps’ isn’t just for the White kids whose parents sent them to Eton; it’s now for the Brown kids whose parents sent them to Eton too.
It helped them further the idea of Good racialised people, and Bad racialised people. By dividing us in two along their lines, Conservatives pretended that any laws they pass that would cause harm on the basis of race would only harm those who are deemed undesirable within the racialised system of Britain. Good “minorities” who agree with them get to become MPs, while Bad “minorities” are the ones who will be affected by things like Voter ID laws.
It helps them pretend that structural racism does not exist. Black and Brown MPs like Kemi Badenoch insist that nothing is wrong in the UK, and to challenge them is to undermine their lived experience. As though by being a Black Conservative, they can suddenly undermine decades of case studies and experiences.
Through all of this, they have irrevocably stripped Substantive Representation from Descriptive Representation. These new Black and Brown faces in high places signalled progressive change while continuing to strengthen structural injustice.
(Image description: An illustration shows a brown passport with yellow text on the left, a yellow globe icon with "passport" underneath in the center, and a voter registration card with black writing on the right.)
In the last few years, the previous Tory government has made it harder for us to vote (Voter Identification Regulations 2022), expanded its powers to remove our citizenship (Nationality and Borders Act 2021), and made it increasingly more challenging to engage in protest (The Police, Crime and Sentencing Act 22). They have taken tangible steps towards strengthening the British Empire and their ability to silence or remove anyone it needs to.
What the Conservatives effectively did was take the idea of representation and make it into a trojan horse of white supremacy. No matter whether Labour undoes every policy or starts adding its own- the concept of representation has been tainted and damaged in a way we can’t unsee.
What does this mean for the charity sector?
The charity sector has struggled with representation since its roots in the 1800s. It was created to be a specifically non-representative structure—a way for the middle class to "provide support" to the working class while interfering with their lives and trying to control the people they supposedly sought to help.
Today, we can still feel these roots in the sector and see attempts to change.
EDI ( Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) initiatives, at their best, are attempts to make workplaces more welcoming to a more diverse workforce. Lived Experience Leadership provides an opportunity to those with direct At their best, EDI initiatives are attempts to make workplaces more welcoming to a more diverse workforce. Lived experience leadership allows those with direct experience of social issues to represent themselves in decision-making. More and more charities have participation strategies or participation officers that aim to bring communities into decision-making experience of the social problems to represent themselves. More and more charities have participation strategies or participation officers that aim to bring communities into decision-making and service design.
In all of this, there is an assumption that the structure is correct, but the people need to change and that throwing enough “BAME” people into the system will suddenly make it work better. We can see from our politics that this isn’t true. For those in the charity sector who are still wedded to this belief that representation is enough for political transformation, it is essential to look at what the state has done with this to know clearly and precisely why representation will not save us now.
It’s already falling short. We know racism in the sector isn’t going anywhere, no matter how senior a person might be or how much we believe in our EDI policies. We know that Lived Experience can mean putting the onus of solving problems squarely onto those traumatised by it. We know that participatory methods can be manipulated or ignored.
[Image description: An image of a Black woman with a distressed expression, surrounded by smiling bald white individuals with their eyes closed, looking towards her.]
It’s also important to remember that it’s not just about putting racialised faces into White-led organisations. The charity sector does have many Black-led organisations that are doing fantastic work. Rather than supporting them to thrive on their own, they receive proportionately less funding than their white counterparts. In this situation, representation becomes a bit of a misdirection—if we’re always worrying about how we take part in other spaces, we might forget that our own spaces are missing out on the support they deserve.
These attempts to change who participates in the system miss the point: this system needs to change.
[Image description: On the left, a Black woman is smiling, and on the right, the same woman is frowning at her smiling self. The background is abstract, featuring shades of brown, orange, and yellow.]
Where do we go from here?
We must acknowledge what representation did for us while accepting that it has reached its limits. The successes of the past are doing fantastic work. Rather than supporting them to thrive independently, they receive proportionately less funding than their white counterparts. In this situation, representation becomes a misdirection. Those moments of joy at seeing faces and bodies that look like ours take up positions of power were not worthless, and it’s not my intention to undermine any of this.
But we have to move beyond representation now. We must understand that it has been irrevocably damaged as an idea, and it’s not enough to make any of the changes we desperately need. What was once aspirational is now the bare minimum.
Representation opened the door for us, but now we must consider what it might mean should we walk through it. With the advent of a Labour government, what will this trojan horse of representation politics look like and mean within our broader political systems? I, for one, am not holding my breath for liberation through representational politics.
[Image description: An illustration of a person walking through a door.]