This submission draws on Maxim Institute’s prior policy research, peer-reviewed scientific and policy literature, and government reports. It addresses the profound social, economic, and legal interventions introduced during New Zealand’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic—interventions that were among the most significant in our modern history.

Central to the government’s pandemic response were lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and extensive public health messaging. These policies were justified by urgency and public safety during an unprecedented time. However, many actions lacked clear evidence of effectiveness or proportionality. The government abandoned its existing pandemic plan in favour of an unsustainable elimination strategy, pursued without a credible exit plan.

Lockdowns continued even after the elimination goal was quietly dropped, despite growing evidence that lockdowns were ineffective at reducing mortality and caused significant harm to social trust and economic well-being. Key legislation, including the “traffic light” system, was passed under urgency, undermining constitutional norms and reducing scrutiny.

Vaccine mandates and passports imposed heavy economic and social pressure on individuals, despite emerging evidence that vaccines did not prevent transmission. These mandates violated rights protected by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, worsened workforce shortages in vital sectors like healthcare and emergency services, and contributed to lasting distrust in public institutions. The decline in childhood immunisation rates and the 2022 protest at Parliament are among the consequences of this civic fracture.

Public communication during the pandemic—anchored by the government’s claim to be the “single source of truth”—overstated the evidence and dismissed dissenting voices. Government funding of media outlets further undermined the perception of independent scrutiny, while efforts to counter misinformation blurred important lines between government action and independent civil society activity, notably through the Disinformation Project’s politicised role.

A clear-eyed, critical assessment of these decisions is crucial for future pandemic preparedness and for rebuilding public confidence in health systems, governance, and the rule of law.