New Zealand Poll Reveals Discontent Over Former Leaders’ Absence

New Zealanders have expressed significant disagreement with former Labour ministers—Dame Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Grant Robertson, and Dr. Ayesha Verrall—for their decision not to testify at a public session of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 pandemic. A recent minute from the commission confirmed their refusal to appear, prompting a wave of public discontent.

According to a snap poll conducted by Curia Market Research for the Taxpayers’ Union, a majority of New Zealanders believe that these former leaders should be held accountable and provide evidence during the inquiry. The poll, conducted between October 26 and 27, 2023, included 500 participants selected from an online panel. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4%, which is notably higher than that typically seen in political polling.

The inquiry aims to assess the government’s response to the Covid-19 crisis, a significant topic for many citizens who experienced the pandemic’s impacts firsthand. Participants in the poll were informed about the ministers’ decision not to testify, raising questions about transparency and accountability in government actions during the health crisis.

Public opinion appears to lean toward the belief that the former ministers have a responsibility to contribute to the commission’s findings. Many respondents indicated that their absence from the public hearing diminishes trust in the government’s handling of the pandemic response.

The Royal Commission of Inquiry was established to investigate New Zealand’s management of the Covid-19 pandemic, focusing on various aspects including public health responses, economic impacts, and overall effectiveness of crisis management. Citizens expect insights that could inform future public health policies and strategies.

As the inquiry progresses, the public and stakeholders continue to monitor developments closely. The refusal of these prominent figures to participate in the inquiry raises concerns about the potential implications for the commission’s findings and the integrity of the inquiry process itself.