Covid-19 inquiry row reignites political battle over pandemic legacy
Former Labour ministers defend inquiry no-show
To a greater or lesser extent, four former Labour ministers – Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Grant Robertson and Ayesha Verrall – spent much of yesterday defending their decision not to appear at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19. As summarised in a minute published by the commission this week, the four believed their attendance would have been 'performative' rather than 'informative' and expressed concerns that livestreamed or published evidence could be manipulated or misused, especially given reports of abuse towards earlier witnesses. All have already provided extensive private testimony – Ardern's spokesperson said her most recent interview lasted three hours – and offered to answer any further questions in private, The Post's Kelly Dennett reports (paywalled)
Writing in the Herald (paywalled), Thomas Coughlan says Ardern and her colleagues had good reasons to stay away: 'What some of the royal commission hawks seem to want is not an inquiry, but a trial', in which the ex-ministers are punished with a 'brief, livestreamed public grilling for their perceived crimes'.
Government seizes on 'gutless' decision
Government ministers were swift to condemn the Labour group's decision. As RNZ's Russell Palmer reports, deputy prime minister David Seymour accused the group of 'running from accountability', contrasting their daily televised briefings during the pandemic with their reluctance to front now. Senior minister Chris Bishop said they were 'ashamed of their record', highlighting the 'debt disaster' the government had inherited as a result of Labour's pandemic-era spending. Justice minister Judith Collins called Ardern's decision 'gutless and hypocritical', while foreign minister Winston Peters said the 'Podium of Truth' – a reference to Ardern's 1pm Covid-era updates – had become the 'Podium of Evasion'.
Meanwhile prime minister Christopher Luxon stated confidently, but wrongly, that the four had defied a summons. In fact, explains Stuff's Lloyd Burr, the commission confirmed it had decided against compelling attendance, judging that doing so would be adversarial and unlikely to yield new information. The chair, Grant Illingworth KC, said their non-appearance would not hinder the inquiry's work, though public confidence might have been enhanced had they attended.
Phase two under fire
Hipkins has previously criticised the second phase of the inquiry – established by the current government – as 'far more political' than the first, accusing it of providing a platform for 'conspiracy theorist views'. He argued the terms of reference had been 'deliberately constructed to achieve a particular outcome', in part by excluding from consideration the period when Labour governed with NZ First. Phase two covers the years 2021 and 2022 only, and examines whether lockdowns, vaccine mandates, MIQ and other measures struck the right balance between public health and social and economic costs.
But the inquiry has also faced scrutiny from the right. Documents obtained by Newsroom's Marc Daalder show Act's Brooke van Velden, the minister responsible for royal commissions, was advised to press Illingworth to improve planning, risk assessment and reporting, warning that failure to deliver on time and within budget would 'further undermine' confidence. Van Velden says she now has confidence in the chair and still expects the final report to be delivered to her by February 2026.
Debating the pandemic's toll
While the inquiry probes the social consequences of the Covid-19 response, debate continues over its impact on mortality. Writing in The Spinoff last month, University of Canterbury epidemiologist Michael Plank examined claims that New Zealand dramatically under-reported excess deaths to the end of 2023. His team found total deaths between 2020 and 2023 were between 2% higher and 0.8% lower than expected – far below excess mortality rates in countries like the UK or US.
The timing of excess deaths closely matched Covid-19 waves, suggesting the virus, not indirect effects, was the main driver. Plank concluded: 'New Zealand's response was far from perfect, and there were undoubtedly harms as a result of lockdowns and other measures that are not reflected in mortality statistics. But there can be no doubt that the response saved thousands of lives compared with the alternatives.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 minutes ago
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to Editor: inquiry, 1080, airport
Today's letters to the Editor include discussion about the inquiry into the government response to the Covid-19 pandemic, 1080 drops by DOC, and an airport in Central Otago. It is reported that former ministers have refused to attend a Royal Commission of Inquiry hearing. (ODT 14.8.25) That is probably well advised, as we have seen the venom expressed by a few members of our society who sometimes have anonymously created a web of hatred and misleading theory over the actions of the Labour government trying to protect us from the effects of this new and unknown pandemic. Yes there were mistakes made, and some suffered the emotional loss of not being with their dearest as they died. Some found the mandates offensive, and some were concerned about loss of personal freedom. The hearing will give some more insight into the causes and effects of a worldwide pandemic such as this. The steps taken were, I believe, in good faith and given that this pandemic was a new and unknown viral variation, the government under advice, took the only steps it could. It is worthwhile reading the article "Analysing past pandemics to inform future responses" (ODT 13.8.25). This outlined just how quickly the Spanish Flu of 1918 spread; and remember, no commercial airlines. It was estimated that worldwide 50 million people died. New Zealand lost 9000 in six weeks. That is equivalent to 40,000 today. Preparedness and survival during the next pandemic will depend on readiness and mandates such as vaccines and movement control, so we should be grateful for the work that our epidemiologists are doing. You may be alive and angry, but please consider those who survived because of strong mitigation by our leaders who tried to do the right thing. David Blair Port Chalmers [Abridged — length. Editor.] Take care I have observed that for some time there has been a crashed car down the bank on one of the corners of Three Mile Hill. There is a temporary speed limit of 30kmh on a section of the corners which has now become semi-permanent, with the recommended speed signs being replaced by circular 30 signs. The question arises as to why the crashed car has not been removed? On the subject of the temporary speed restriction, I have endeavoured to reduce my normal speed and stick to the limit. This has inevitably caused some impatient motorists to tailgate and on one occasion, the person passed me on a blind corner with another car coming the other way. My message is to drive with care over Three Mile Hill, especially in winter. John Batt Wakari Surcharge woes This government is not spending wisely, as they claim. Telling thousands of retailers that they are not allowed to add a surcharge for credit and contactless etc payments will result in employing lots of people to administer/prosecute those that don't comply which is wasteful. By telling banks that they can't charge retailers extra for that service when there are very few of them to check up on is much better. Banks make huge profits: they can carry that extra cost. Retailers that are struggling won't have to increase their costs to cover what the banks are charging for that service, thus not increasing the pressure on the cost of living. What is the government afraid of? Robert Morey Dunedin Centenary North Otago Rural Women New Zealand will be celebrating the centenary of the founding of the organisation with a luncheon at the Brydone Hotel on August 29. Guest speaker will be ODT business and rural editor Sally Rae. Registration of interest from current and former members: Judy Kingan jaydeekgn@ The reason why use of 'super toxin' opposed RE the ODT article "Doc claims predators bigger threat than 1080" (9.8.25). Having monitored several 1080 poison drops, one in particular defies all the robust science I have read and what I have witnessed. In 2002 Ecological Networks carried out, at the request of Doc, a study on the effects of 1080 poison on tomtits in the Waianakarua Scenic Reserve. Three days after the drop I and a few others had a casual walk through the poisoned area and picked up 16 dead tomtits along with dead brown creeper, a grey warbler and blackbirds. More decomposed bird carcasses were found in later months. The only dead predators found were half a dozen possums: no rats, cats, mice, ferrets, stoats, hedgehogs or weasels but plenty of dead deer and birds. All tomtits were offered to the Doc for autopsy: they declined saying 'we only have funding for one autopsy a year'. Sometime later I was invited along with other interested parties to a Maf biosecurity meeting in Christchurch to discuss a pest management strategy in Christchurch at which Doc didn't turn up. I took to the meeting a map of all the grid-referenced dead birds found in the Waianakarua Scenic Reserve to show a senior Landcare scientist in attendance and asked him to extrapolate the total bird deaths in the 4000ha reserve. He said he had heard of that operation; he came up with a figure that astounded me — 10,000. Is it any wonder I and many others continually oppose the use of this poison known as a super toxin? Lewis Hore Oamaru Plot loss It seems Dunedin City Council has more interest in creating playgrounds in George St than in creating essential parking or drop-off areas for hospital staff. Have we not lost the plot here? Graham Kitchin Oamaru Common sense hoped for in airport debate There has been quite a lot of plotting to build a new international airport somewhere in Central Otago. Christchurch City Holdings seem hell-bent on a new airport at Tarras. But when you land there you would require a bus to Queenstown which would take 90 minutes or more. Not acceptable. It is my contention that these plans are seriously flawed. Firstly the government, I'm sure, would possibly like fewer airports in the South Island not more. I doubt if it would support this pie-in-the-sky plan. Secondly it would seem to me to be far more practical to expand the Dunedin airport, particularly internationally, and then arrange domestic flights to Wanaka, Queenstown or anywhere. If you fly into San Francisco and want to go inland this is achieved with a domestic service rather than building a new international airport inland. I hope common sense prevails. Andrew Burton Lowburn Letters changes The Otago Daily Times welcomes letters. They are a vital part of the newspaper, and an important forum for readers to express their views. To make it easier for us to receive your letters we have created a new email address — letters@ — for you to write to us at. The old system, whereby letters were sent to an "editor" address, meant that letters were being missed due to the sheer volume of emails received. Letters will receive an automatic reply to say that the ODT has received your submission and that it is under consideration. Letters longer than 250 words may require abridgement; in some cases they will be rejected because they are too long. Our letters rules are at the bottom of the page. Rest assured, all letters sent to the ODT are read. However, we will seldom enter into discussion about selection or editing. We look forward to receiving your letters at letters@ — Editor
Otago Daily Times
2 minutes ago
- Otago Daily Times
Amend away, amend away
Dunedin Labour MP Rachel Brooking has run a few marathons in her time, and she put in another long-distance effort in the House this week. She wasn't keeping count, but by my tally she delivered 31 speeches this week — and it would have been 32 but for her having to leave for the airport on Thursday afternoon to catch the last convenient flight home. As would be expected, it was the Resource Management Act which dominated Brooking's week, although she also found the time to delve into the inner workings of the Local Government (Water Services) Bill, and the Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana Marine Protection Bill as well. It was the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill which kept Brooking going for most of the week though. The relevant minister, Chris Bishop, has been labouring with a heavy cold all week and his heart must have sunk as Brooking — armed with pens, post-it notes and slabs of drafts and amendment papers — rose to her feet on Tuesday afternoon. Parliament is blessed with many MPs who can pick the minutest bone with any word or sentence — the Greens' Lawrence Xu-Nan and Bishop himself when in Opposition spring to mind — but few are as forensic and diligent as Brooking when it comes to working through clauses and sub-clauses. And she had plenty of material, the minister having just that morning tabled a substantial amendment paper. So substantial, in fact, that what Brooking suspected had happened was that the version of the Bill reported back from select committee — and not as yet agreed to by Parliament — had been used as the template for the soon to be amended again Bill. "This is a terrible way to make laws," Brooking lamented. "It's very frustrating, when you have been through a select committee process and have asked about the wording of different phrases and made amendments in the select committee process, to see that all upended on the day of the committee stage of the Bill." Bishop, to his credit, was somewhat repentant about that: "In mitigation, most of the changes in the Amendment Paper have been publicly announced, in some cases, a couple of months, if not earlier, than today. So members have had a good opportunity to kick those issues around." As it turned out, they were about to do a lot more kicking ... and not without good reason, as the Bill — now an Act — attempted to achieve a heck of a lot within its many pages. The much-criticised RMA is due to be axed next year: in the meantime the Amendment Act makes a many short-term changes to time frames for consent processing in areas such as infrastructure, renewable energy, farming and consenting after natural disaster. It is very broad in some places and narrowly specific in others — such as allowing the demolition of Wellington's Gordon Wilson flats and allowing Auckland to develop land around its railway stations. A lot of this is reasonable, Brooking agreed, in her third reading speech. "Labour was supporting this Bill when it was introduced and even at the second reading, despite having concerns about some of the changes that were made at select committee," she said. "But something happened on Tuesday morning. That was that a very large Amendment Paper was dropped and it made significant changes to the Bill. Changes that we were not even able to debate in this House because government members chose to stand up and close the debate on these very important aspects." Brooking then proceeded to give the government a stern and emotional telling off for its terrible law making ... none of which was enough to stop it being passed by lunchtime Thursday. Best supporting actor Taieri Green list MP Scott Willis also deserves an honorable mention in despatches for his efforts this week. Not only did he put his shoulder to the wheel with a succession of interventions on the aforementioned RMA Bill, he also had a crack at Science minister Shane Reti during Question Time on Thursday concerning job losses in the sector. Answering Willis' question about how many jobs had been lost in the sector since the formation of the government, Reti conceded that 134 jobs were to go with the disestablishment of Callaghan Innovation — the point that Willis was trying to make — but Reti also highlighted a Stats NZ survey which suggested a recent increase of people working in the sector. Which is not the same as jobs being lost, a point Willis soon made ... as well as pointedly asking if those laid-off scientists would be heading to the airport departure lounge post-haste. "I think that scientists who have been disestablished through part of the reforms will have a skill set that will be able to be applied in other parts of the science sector," Reti replied — which is true, but which also side-stepped the question of in which country's science sector that might be.
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Eye-Watering Break Fee For Botched Ferries
It has been revealed that the Government is paying a staggering $144 million to cancel the previous contract for the new Interislander ferries. 'Nicola Willis' terrible decision-making has now cost taxpayers more than half a billion dollars in total – $671 million – with no new ferries to show for it,' Labour transport spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. 'The $144 million break fee is on top of money already paid to Hyundai, which takes the amount of taxpayer money National has poured down the drain to $222 million. The rest is project management, landside infrastructure and paying to wind down the project – totalling more than half a billion. 'This proves Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis have absolutely no clue what they're doing and are just making things worse. 'The amount of taxpayer money they've wasted with absolutely nothing to show for it makes a mockery of every time they've said they can't afford something. 'They can find more than half a billion dollars to botch a ferry project, but can't find any money to build homes, create jobs or fund the health system properly. 'People are struggling with the cost of living while Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon's economic decisions run aground and sink,' Tangi Utikere said. Notes: Original estimates of $1.16 billion referenced in the Beehive PR includes the originally budgeted $300 million for the break fee plus the cost of ongoing maintenance of the current ferries. The contract was originally going to deliver the ferries next year, in 2026. The current projection for new ferries is at least three years later.
