Coalition parties slam former Labour ministers' no-show at Covid-19 public hearing
Photo:
RNZ / Dom Thomas
All three coalition parties are criticising Labour's former ministers for
refusing to appear at a public Covid-19 hearing
, saying they're trying to avoid scrutiny.
The second phase of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 Pandemic was secured in coalition agreements between all three governing parties.
The chair, Grant Illingworth KC, on Wednesday confirmed a week-long public hearing with decision makers would not go ahead because former ministers had refused to participate.
They include former prime minister Jacinda Ardern, current Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who was at times the health and Covid-19 response minister, former finance minister Grant Robertson and former health minister Ayesha Verrall.
Those former ministers argue they have provided ample evidence privately to the commission, which - despite having the power to - declined to summons them, saying on balance it was "undesirable given that the former ministers continue to co-operate with the evidence-gathering of the inquiry".
"We are confident that the former ministers declining to attend the hearing does not hamper us in our ability to obtain the information we need to be able to properly complete our task. Public hearings are only one mechanism of obtaining evidence, and their use is restricted under our terms of reference," Illingworth said.
The reasoning the ministers gave to the inquiry - according to a document the inquiry released - included that former ministers were conventionally interviewed privately for Royal Commissions of Inquiry, that they had cooperated so far and repeating the evidence publicly would be "performative rather than informative", and it risked the recordings being "tampered with, manipulated or otherwise
misused
".
The document noted other witnesses and their families had faced abuse after appearing in public hearings, including in
the Royal Commission held in July
.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins
Photo:
RNZ / Mark Papalii
Hipkins told
Morning Report
he has been interviewed in private, answered every question fully and even given the commission more information than what he had originally been asked.
He accused those involved with the Royal Commission of not knowing what they wanted because they had said public hearings wouldn't be held for five reasons, including avoiding participants being subject to abuse.
"They indicated at the end of that interview [his private appearance] ... that they didn't have any further questions and any public hearing would simply be a repeat of any questions they'd already asked me."
Hipkins acknowledged that the pandemic was "a really difficult time", however, he said he answered questions from both the media and the public on a daily basis.
Asked what he had to lose by fronting up, Hipkins responded that all the former ministers had followed the same protocol for the Covid commission as had occurred in the past, citing the examples of former Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee at the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission of inquiry and other ministers involved in the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch mosque attacks.
Ardern stood by her decision not to participate, with a spokesperson saying she had recently provided a three-hour interview and remained available to answer any further questions the commission had.
Hipearlier earlier spoke to reporters at Parliament to defend his decision, and Verrall provided a written statement. Robertson, who is now vice chancellor at Otago University, did not respond to RNZ's requests for comment.
File photo. Senior National MP Chris Bishop said the former ministers were "ashamed of their record."
Photo:
VNP/Louis Collins
Senior National MP Chris Bishop used the general debate on Wednesday to call attention to their refusal, saying it was "perhaps unsurprising".
"They are ashamed of their record, and they know that held up to the light the decisions they made in 2020 and 2021 and 2022 have led us into the problems we are enduring today," he said.
"It was really clear from the second half of 2020 and into 2021 that further stimulus of the New Zealand economy was not only not required, it was counterproductive."
He said Treasury pointed to 36 percent of spending for the Covid response happening after June 2021.
"At that point, GDP had already returned to its pre-pandemic levels and inflation was already outside the band and approaching 7.3 percent ... from financial year 2015 to 2019, core Crown debt was actually flat - it actually went down a bit. But from 2019 to 2023, net core Crown debt increased by 169 percent to $155 billion.
"That is the debt disaster this government inherited. That is the inflation disaster this government inherited. That is the cause of the recession this government inherited."
ACT leader David Seymour.
Photo:
RNZ / Marika Khabazi
ACT leader David Seymour mimed running away from reporters before saying "kidding, that's the other guys".
He said a lot of people would see the former ministers refusing to appear publicly as "running from accountability, and that's what erodes that trust".
"I would have thought if you cared about this country and responding to its next pandemic, which will happen, then you'd want to front up and tell your story," he said.
"It's good that they've co-operated in privacy, we're told, but I think the New Zealand people deserve them to show up ... I think there was an opportunity here to come and explain their perspective. Maybe we have it wrong, but they're not doing it."
He particularly focused on Hipkins.
"The contrast between his behavior during the pandemic - when they do anything to get in front of the cameras, when we had to endure a 20 minute lecture before they gave us the daily numbers - compared with this behavior we've learned about today, I think that contrast speaks for itself."
Asked about concerns of abuse, Seymour said the former ministers had a public duty to front up.
"Are we going to let a small group of anti-social people stop our great nation from having a democratic discourse? I think the simple facts are we don't decide that 'because there's a few crazies out there we're no longer going to have a Parliament'."
NZ First leader Winston Peters
shared his views on X
, saying the former ministers "colluded and decided to decline to give evidence".
"The 'Podium of Truth' has become the 'Podium of Evasion'. These former ministers do not want to sit in a public hearing and answer the hard questions that every New Zealander deserves to know. If ever there was a definition for "a different kind of 'abuse of' power" this is it."
He said they were undermining the second inquiry to avoid public scrutiny.
"Those former Labour Ministers have shown they care nothing about public confidence, and worse, are treating the entire public with distain (sic) and contempt ... and had a disastrous effect on the economy and future of our country - yet they refuse to be held to account."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Dr Robert Patman on Israel and Palestine
A series of rallies and vigils are being held around the country today in a 'national day of action' planned by Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. It comes in a week where Israel launched attacks on Gaza City and killed five Al-Jazeera journalists in a targeted strike. Green co-leader Chloe Swarbrick was suspended from parliament after saying MPs could "grow a spine" and support her bill which would impose sanctions on Israel. While Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had 'lost the plot' after launching a take-over of Gaza City. Otago University Professor of International Relations, Dr Robert Patman speaks to Mihingarangi Forbes. Palestinians queue to fill up on drinking water in the sweltering heat in the Mawasi area of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on 12 August, 2025. Photo: AFP
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Tāmaki Makaurau: By-election:Peeni Henare
On September 6 the Tāmaki Makaurau by-election will be held. It was triggered by the passing of Takutai Tarsh Kemp of Te Pāti Māori. She beat Labour's Peeni Henare by only 42 votes in 2023 - and he is back to contest the seat along with former broadcaster Oriini Kaipara, Vision New Zealand's Hannah Tamaki, Sherry-Lee Matene as an independent and New Zealand Loyal's Kelvyn Alp. Peeni Henare speaks to Mihingarangi about his vision for the electorate. Oriini Kaipara (left) and Peeni Henare. Photo: YouTube / Newshub, RNZ / Angus Dreaver
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Ban on protesting outside homes rebalances freedom of expression and privacy rights
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has announced protesting outside someone's home will become an offence. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The government's ban on protesting outside someone's home will rebalance the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy, a law professor says. But another academic has questioned whether a new law is necessary, and says police may struggle to enforce it. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced on Friday protesting outside someone's home would become an offence, punishable with a fine or jail time. While it would apply to all residences, Goldsmith said there had been increased reports of demonstrations targeting the homes of public figures like MPs, judges and other officials. Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis said current laws around protests only related to public settings. "Protests that take place outside someone's home really do intrude into a sort of domestic sphere where people usually feel they should be able to exist unperturbed and unthreatened," he said. "So this particular change in the law will help to restrike that balance." Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Geddis said the change would plug a legal gap highlighted by a Supreme Court ruling nearly two decades ago. The 2007 case, Brooker v Police, involved a man who was convicted of disorderly behaviour for standing outside a police officer's house playing the guitar and singing protest songs against her, he said. But the Supreme Court found his behaviour was not disorderly. "The Supreme Court said that disorderly behaviour only applies to the public consequences of your behaviour, how that affects the public place. "And just because it's intruding into someone's private home, that's not a consideration as to whether the protest is covered by disorderly behaviour," he said. It meant the balance between people's rights within their home and people's rights to protest in public was "out of whack", Geddis said. One of the judges noted the court's finding could lead to more protests outside people's homes, and Parliament would need to consider that at some point, he said. "It turns out he was right." Victoria University law professor Steven Price said police may find it hard to enforce the new law. Goldsmith said it would be tightly targeted and prohibit "unreasonable disruptions", but Price said the independent police watchdog's review of policing protests found officers struggled to make a call on that. "What the IPCA had to say about that ... is that police have trouble on the ground having to make fine distinctions about what's an unreasonable disruption and what's not, and that seems a fair point to make," he said. "But on the face of [Goldsmith's] press release, it doesn't really solve the problem." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
