Image source: Wikimedia Commons
The first phase of New Zealand’s Royal Commission of Inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic has delivered a comprehensive 713-page report detailing the country’s response to the global health crisis. Released last Thursday, November 28, the report reflects on the early successes and subsequent challenges of managing the pandemic while charting a course for future preparedness.
With 39 actionable recommendations, the report is the inception of a roadmap for the government to implement in response to inevitable future pandemics.
See the full report here.
NZ’s COVID-19 Response Under the Microscope
The report praised New Zealand’s initial response to COVID-19. A strategy centred on elimination saw the country achieve some of the lowest death rates among OECD nations during the pandemic’s early years. The report attributes this success to swift border closures, strict nationwide lockdowns, and aggressive testing and contact tracing.
The alert level system, described as “world-leading,” effectively communicated the restrictions to the public, fostering high compliance in the initial phases of the pandemic. Tight border controls and rigorous testing protocols prevented widespread transmission, giving New Zealanders a temporary reprieve while vaccines were developed.
However, as the pandemic evolved, so too did the challenges. The report acknowledged that the prolonged use of lockdowns and vaccine mandates eroded social cohesion, with the 2021 Auckland lockdown and the enforcement of vaccine requirements becoming flashpoints for discontent.
Successes vs Strain
The report looks closely at the health and economic successes of New Zealand’s pandemic strategy. Some key successes were found. At its peak, hospitalisations due to COVID-19 were about half the rates experienced in the United States and the United Kingdom. The economy, buoyed by timely fiscal measures, rebounded quickly, outpacing pre-pandemic GDP levels by the third quarter of 2020. Students in New Zealand missed fewer school days than their international counterparts, though the impacts were uneven across socio-economic and ethnic groups.
However, the government’s readiness was found wanting in several critical areas. While certain elements of pandemic preparedness were in place, they proved insufficient for an event of COVID-19’s scale and duration. Testing and contact tracing systems struggled to keep up with the virus’s rapid spread during later waves, and the reliance on lockdowns highlighted gaps in the country’s public health infrastructure.
The report also noted that lockdowns had “cumulative and multifaceted” effects on the population, particularly in Auckland, where prolonged restrictions exacerbated mental health challenges and economic strain. Groups disproportionately affected included Māori, Pasifika communities, and lower socio-economic households.
Vaccine Mandates
The Royal Commission’s report placed significant focus on the controversial use of vaccine mandates during New Zealand’s COVID-19 response, describing them as a “major source of tension and social division.” While they were initially deemed “reasonable” for specific high-risk occupations such as healthcare workers, border officials, and workers in correctional facilities, the report found their application eventually became overly broad and prolonged.
One of the inquiry’s most striking conclusions was that mandates “undeniably” eroded public trust in government institutions. Although many New Zealanders supported the mandates at the height of the pandemic, a substantial minority experienced significant pain, both socially and economically. Professor Tony Blakely, chair of the inquiry, emphasised the deep-seated harm caused, stating that mandates were “hugely painful” for some and urged caution in their future use. “In the future, we only want to be reaching for mandatory things where it’s proportionate,” he noted.
The report revealed that the mandates gradually eroded the social cohesion initially fostered by New Zealand’s pandemic response. The divisive policies not only led to social fissures but also became a lightning rod for misinformation and disinformation. The prolonged occupation of Parliament grounds in 2022 underscored the extent of the growing tension and distrust.
The Commission further criticised the long-term implementation of mandates, particularly following the emergence of the Omicron variant. As vaccine efficacy in preventing transmission diminished and immunity waned, the justification for widespread mandates weakened significantly. The inquiry noted that the prolonged use of these measures contributed to reduced vaccine uptake in general and increased public resistance to other public health initiatives.
Looking ahead, the report’s findings suggest a more nuanced approach to vaccine mandates in future pandemics. Such measures should only be implemented when necessary and accompanied by strong efforts to communicate their benefits transparently and empathetically. Furthermore, the report stresses the importance of addressing the broader social and economic impacts of such policies.
The Report’s Recommendations
The report proposes 39 recommendations for addressing the shortcomings identified during the pandemic and strengthening the nation’s resilience. Central to these recommendations is the establishment of a dedicated pandemic response agency to coordinate planning and implementation across government sectors.
Key recommendations stress the need for:
– Scalable testing and contact tracing systems.
– Flexible quarantine and isolation options.
– Enhanced public health infrastructure, including improved ventilation standards in buildings.
– A detailed, all-of-government pandemic response plan.
Ethical considerations also feature prominently in the report. It advises balancing individual rights with public health needs, particularly during prolonged emergencies. It calls for transparent communication and the inclusion of diverse perspectives, including Māori and Pacific communities, in pandemic planning and response efforts.
Professor Michael Baker from the University of Otago praised the report’s emphasis on strategic planning and preparedness. “It provides a very welcome and needed road map for future pandemic planning,” he said. However, he expressed concern about recent job cuts at Te Whatu Ora, New Zealand’s public health agency, warning that such reductions could undermine efforts to implement the recommendations.
A Game of Two Halves
The report’s lead commissioner, Australian epidemiologist Tony Blakely, described New Zealand’s pandemic response as a “game of two halves.” While the first year showcased the country’s ability to unite in the face of a common threat, later years revealed vulnerabilities in long-term planning and communication.
Blakely highlighted the importance of preparing for a range of potential pandemic scenarios, noting that reliance on ad hoc measures, such as extended lockdowns, could be avoided with better foresight and investment.
Expert Responses and Public Discourse
Responses to the report have been mixed but largely supportive. Professor Michael Plank commended the report’s balanced approach, describing New Zealand’s early response as “highly effective” but acknowledging the toll of prolonged restrictions on public trust. He echoed the call for investment in public health systems, noting that many of the challenges faced were due to limited resources.
Dr Siouxsie Wiles, a microbiologist at the University of Auckland, welcomed the report’s focus on improving ventilation and filtration. She also said, “It is true that if we had been better prepared, we could have done things differently, and this is where the 39 recommendations come in—to better prepare us for the next pandemic because there will be a next pandemic,” as reported by Science Media Centre.
Others, such as Dr Helen Petousis-Harris, highlighted the report’s lack of proactive measures to address the challenges posed by misinformation and disinformation, calling for more robust strategies to counteract these threats. She agreed with the report’s criticism of the “single source of truth” approach, which was found to have inadvertently fueled public distrust.
Future Steps: Phase Two and Beyond
The Royal Commission’s work is far from over. The second phase of the inquiry, which began on November 29, 2024, will delve deeper into contentious issues such as vaccine safety and efficacy, social and economic impacts, and the prolonged Auckland lockdown. This phase is expected to deliver its findings by early 2026.
Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden has welcomed the report, pointing to the government’s commitment to acting on its recommendations. However, she acknowledged that implementing the report’s findings would require significant coordination and resources.
Former COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins described the report as “really useful” but stressed the difficulty of decisions made in real-time during the pandemic, as opposed to criticising them in retrospect. He emphasised the importance of learning from past experiences: “It’s not a question of if another pandemic will happen; it’s a question of when.”
Conclusion
The Royal Commission’s first-phase report is a crucial document and a critical first step towards New Zealand’s future pandemic preparedness. Acknowledging our successes, addressing the shortcomings, and providing actionable recommendations offer a pathway for approaching future crises with greater efficiency and equity.