
What the Covid-19 inquiry is teaching us
The power – and price – of going early
The inquiry acknowledges that our early, bold elimination strategy was effective at saving lives. Compared with many other nations, New Zealand avoided mass deaths and overwhelmed hospitals. But it came with real costs: social isolation, educational disruption, economic harm, and deep psychological strain, especially in communities already living with inequity. For some, the border closures and MIQ system became a symbol of safety; for others, of exclusion and despair.
A pandemic plan built for the wrong pandemic
New Zealand's pre-Covid pandemic plans were largely geared towards influenza. This wasn't a case of simply dusting off an out-of-date playbook. The virus we faced was a novel coronavirus – more contagious, less predictable, and politically destabilising. Critical systems, from intensive care unit capacity to personal protective equipment logistics, weren't scaled or connected in the way a 21st century pandemic demanded. We weren't alone in that, but being unprepared is not something we should now excuse as inevitable.
Who was heard – and who wasn't
Perhaps one of the most damning findings is how poorly the early response incorporated Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations. Māori and Pacific voices were sidelined in national decision-making. Community providers who had the trust, the reach, and the relationships to respond effectively were often bypassed or underused. The equity gap didn't start with Covid-19, but the pandemic made it wider and more visible.
The communication conundrum
Early in the pandemic, New Zealand's public health messaging was lauded globally for its clarity and empathy. But the commission noted that as time went on, messaging became increasingly centralised and inflexible. Tailored communications for diverse populations were often absent. At times when nuance and dialogue were needed, the approach defaulted to broadcast mode rather than engagement.
What phase 2 must tackle
The second phase of the inquiry, now underway, is where the real grit begins. It will scrutinise the rollout of vaccines, particularly whether equity was achieved or merely promised. It will delve into vaccine mandates and their effects on public trust. It will explore the long-term health, economic, and educational impacts of our Covid-19 response. It will ask hard questions about the use of emergency powers and the resilience (or fragility) of our health systems.
Perhaps most importantly, it will examine how trust was won, lost, and exploited. The rise of misinformation and targeted disinformation isn't just a curious byproduct of the pandemic era – it's a feature of our new public health landscape. If we fail to address it, we're not just failing to learn – we're inviting history to repeat itself.
Why it matters
Do we really need another report? Haven't we moved on?
But in science, as in governance, learning from mistakes isn't optional – it's essential. The very act of reflection is a declaration that we take public health seriously, that we value lives lost and saved, and that we are willing to face uncomfortable truths to be better prepared next time.
Pandemics will come again. Whether sparked by zoonotic spillover, synthetic biology, or climate-driven vector shifts, the next crisis is not a matter of if but when. The Royal Commission won't give us all the answers – but it can make sure we ask better questions and build a more inclusive, agile, and evidence-based response.
In the end, the value of this inquiry isn't just in what it reports, but in whether we listen.

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


Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Dunne's Weekly: Ardern Must Front-Up At Covid19 Inquiry
Phase Two of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the government's response to Covid19 and its effects got underway this week, with the commencement of the hearing of public submissions. According to the Commission chair, Grant Illingworth KC, the focus of this aspect of the inquiry is to hear from the public about their experiences, including the impacts on "social division and isolation, health and education, and business activity.' It will also " hear from experts about the key decisions and their consequences, and lessons to be learned from what happened." There will be a further phase of the inquiry next month, to hear from key decision makers who "led and informed" the government's response to the pandemic. Already there have been calls for former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern to return from the United States to give evidence to and be cross-examined by the Royal Commission, but it is not yet clear whether she will do so. Current Labour leader, Chris Hipkins was vague when interviewed about whether Ardern would appear, even though he says he met her in London last week. Ardern has subsequently said that she will be happy to 'provide evidence' to the inquiry but she has so far shied clear of confirming that means she is willing to appear in person. As the person who led New Zealand through the pandemic crisis, and received wide international acclaim for her performance, there is no question that Ardern should front up at the New Zealand inquiry. Failure to do so, given the subsequent national division over the pandemic response, would send all the wrong signals, and would diminish the credibility currently attached to her government's overall Covid19 performance. Appearing before the inquiry would be a clear acceptance of public accountability for actions taken in the national interest during a national crisis. She owes it to New Zealanders – her 'team of five million' – to do so. But whether Ardern decides to front or not, there are clear signs that her Labour Party colleagues are not impressed by the public phases of the inquiry now getting underway. They seem clearly uncomfortable with having to explain and justify their actions to an independent Royal Commission. Hipkins has already dismissed the new stages as being designed to 'achieve a particular outcome, particularly around providing a platform for those who have conspiracy theorist views." While he says he will co-operate with the inquiry and answer all the written questions put to him, he would not commit to appearing in person if asked to do so. 'I don't want to see happen … a whole lot of theatrics. I'm very interested in engaging with them on how … we can capture the lessons … [but] the terms of reference are certainly far more political than the first one,' he said. As with Ardern, Hipkins should appear before the inquiry. He was one of the most senior Ministers involved in the then government's response, and will forever be associated with some of its more controversial measures like the MIQ scheme, restrictions on family reunification in stressful circumstances and the ridiculous short-lived suggestion in late 2021 that Aucklanders might have to get prior government permission for the time of day and dates on which they could leave for the summer holidays. Whatever his concerns about the terms of reference, Hipkins, like Ardern, owes it to all those who suffered through MIQ or not being able to join dying loved ones in their final few hours to front up and publicly justify those actions. There is a third person who should similarly be required to front before the Royal Commission and that is the former Director-General of Health, Sir Ashley Bloomfield. Although the former government was ultimately solely responsible for the various decisions taken, many of those decisions were based on advice provided by Bloomfield. Moreover, during the period of the pandemic, Bloomfield enjoyed a level of access to both the Prime Minister and the whole Cabinet that has not been shared by any other public servant in New Zealand's history. The unique nature of his role at that time makes him more accountable for the decisions taken than any other senior public servant would normally be. A key element of Ardern's, Hipkins' and Bloomfield's success during the pandemic was that they all displayed a consistent level of confidence that they were making the right decisions in the best interests of all New Zealanders. That portrayal of confidence played a key role in getting New Zealanders onside and generally complying with the various measures put in place, despite the considerable disruption to their own lives and circumstances. Given that level of unprecedented upheaval and restriction on personal freedom – greater even than wartime – which people went along with because they believed it was for the greater good, it is now far from unreasonable for New Zealanders to expect Ardern, Hipkins and Bloomfield to appear before the Royal Commission to explain their actions in a way that they would not and could not do at the time. Only then will the Royal Commission be sufficiently informed to report on 'lessons to be learned from what happened.'


Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Deputy PM ‘in awe' of work done at city tech firm
Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour has praised a Dunedin robotics company as being "at the forefront of world technology". The Act New Zealand leader — who is also acting prime minister this week — was in Dunedin yesterday and visited local businesses including the Otago Childcare Centre, Progressive Plastics and Scott Technology. Speaking to the media after touring the automation and robotics solutions provider's factory, Mr Seymour said he was "in awe" of what the people at Scott Technology were doing. "They have robotic knives that can strip a sheep's carcass in six seconds, and to think that is happening here in Dunedin ... what they are doing is absolutely at the forefront of world technology." Mr Seymour, who has a degree in electrical engineering, said the company's digital signal processing involved some of the hardest mathematics you could do. The integration of abstract mathematical modelling and robotic programming showed "incredible teamwork". "To have, at one level, your nerds, if you like, and at another level your tradies working together to create one project ... I think that's very, very cool." Comments he had heard during his visit included on the speed at which parts had been able to be ordered and delivered before the Covid-19 pandemic. Global supply chains had been stretched and interrupted by the pandemic as well as global trade uncertainty, and New Zealand needed more capital equipment, capacity and money being laid down, he said. Anything that allowed businesses to do that more easily was very important, he said. Both Scott Technology and Progressive Plastics benefited "substantially" from foreign direct investment — something he believed the country needed to welcome more of. Watching a demonstration of Scott Technology's BladeStop safety bandsaw on the factory floor are (from left) Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour, general manager Andrew Arnold, service technician James Still and chief executive Mike Christman. Photo: Peter McIntosh The Reserve Bank of New Zealand announced yesterday the official cash rate (OCR) would remain at 3.25%, marking a pause in a series of six consecutive cuts since August last year. In a statement, the Reserve Bank said annual consumers' price inflation would likely increase towards the top of the 1% to 3% target band over mid-2025. But due to spare productive capacity in the economy and declining domestic inflation pressures headline inflation was expected to remain within this band and return to around 2% by early next year. The economic outlook remained "highly uncertain", and further data including on the impacts of tariffs would influence the future path of the OCR, the statement said. Mr Seymour said concerns about headline inflation were being heard around the world. "You see the Australians, they cut hard, then they had a rebound, and then they started cutting again. "In New Zealand, we haven't had to do that. "Far better to be falling, pausing and hopefully falling again, than having to go back for a second look, as other countries have had to." When asked about the role uncertainty around United States tariffs may have played in the Reserve Bank's decision, Mr Seymour said he had "no doubt" the bank was looking at international factors. "I think anyone who's done even five minutes of economics will know that our trade as a trading nation is critical to the prices we see, and they'll be sensitive to that."

NZ Herald
12 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Covid-19 Royal Commission: Jacinda Ardern says she will provide evidence
Former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern says she will provide evidence to the second stage of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19. In a brief statement, a spokesperson said Ardern will provide evidence to assist the commission 'in meeting its terms of reference'. 'We are in discussions about the