What the Covid-19 inquiry is teaching us

As the dust continues to settle from the peak pandemic years, New Zealand is taking a long, hard look in the mirror. The first phase of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19 Lessons Learned has been delivered, and it offers an unflinching account of our preparedness, decisions, and blind spots. The second phase is underway, tasked with interrogating the specifics: vaccination equity, disinformation, and the long shadow Covid cast across our communities.

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 This wasn’t a case of simply dusting off an out-of-date playbook.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

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.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.

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.