While the contents of the testimony contain few surprises, the transcript is notable as much for what it omits as for what it includes.
There are no expressions of regret, no apologies, and no acknowledgment of wrongdoing - an outcome that may not shock those who followed the Government’s approach during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The exchanges themselves are largely evasive, particularly on the issue of vaccine mandates. At one point, the Commission chair told Ardern it would be remiss not to ask whether she had divided the nation. Ardern responded by asking, “In what regard?” - a reply that struck many as disingenuous, given the scale of public opposition at the time, including prolonged protests directly outside her Beehive office.
The testimony also reflects the familiar style critics associate with her leadership: lengthy explanations and abstract language. When asked whether she had regrets, Ardern responded that “regret is a curious word,” avoiding a direct answer.
The timing of the transcript’s release is striking. Just days earlier, a documentary about Ardern debuted on Netflix and has since attracted renewed public attention, earning an Emmy nomination and sparking fresh debate about her legacy. Conversations about the film are occurring across the country, with many viewers reporting mixed emotions after watching it.
Some New Zealanders have expressed discomfort about the animosity directed toward Ardern after her resignation and her subsequent move overseas, saying the country should aspire to be more tolerant.
Others argue that accountability remains a fundamental principle of public office. They note that Ardern stepped down before facing voters in the next election, declined to give public evidence to the Royal Commission, and has largely avoided direct public scrutiny since leaving office.
The one form of accountability she has not escaped, critics say, has come in personal encounters with members of the public, where she has faced blunt and often hostile feedback - a factor some believe contributed to her decision to leave the country.
Whether public sentiment toward Ardern would have softened had she chosen to testify openly before the Commission is impossible to know.
What is clear, however, is that her private testimony has done little to change hardened views. For many observers, it reads as more of the same careful language and deflection that characterised her responses throughout the pandemic.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show. This article was sourced from Newstalk ZB.
7 comments:
I hope that voters remember that Hipkins was the Minister for COVID response.
One thing for sure - she will never live down her promise to unite NZers and deliver the ‘most transparent government ever’.
Her inability to deliver even 10% of the 100,000 Kiwibuild homes transparently provides a measure of what a failure she truly was. And still is as far as NZ is concerned.
Asked whether she had divided the nation. Ardern responded by asking, “In what regard?”
I bet there was a long pause, as she pondered which of several ways she had deliberately and flagrant divided NZ - was it over her Covid extremes, or into Maori and "others" ?
And yes, i do think that she will not return to NZ for safety reasons.
Some time before Ardern announced her decision to step down, an Australian relative told me that they'd very much like her - or somebody like her - over there. I said, you're welcome to her! Either you come and get her, or we'll collectively put her on the next plane. Said relative was startled at my fury with Ardern. In Oz, they get little news about NZ, so my relative was unaware of the level of public anger at what was happening here.
I doubt she'll return. She'll sit in that well-heeled suburb over in Oz, and tell herself and anyone who'll listen lies about how much good she did here while she was PM, and how popular she was. She lacks the courage to front up to the critique in NZ.
It was a reminder of the word salad that says nothing nor takes any accountability
Well, at least she didn't rely on her old staple - "I reject the premise of your question."
Although, no doubt, it had crossed her mind, but thought better of it by raising a question of her own to buy an out. 100% transparency - yeah right!
Anyone who has seen the nutbars spread out across New Zealand threatening violence on Jacinda will understand why she doesn’t want to live here. The internet has done number on some people.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.