ABSTRACT
In global terms, New Zealand (NZ) has managed COVID-19 comparatively well, with low case and death rates, until the arrival of the Omicron variant in November 2021. Like many other states, the New Zealand government has used public health ordinances to impose restrictions on immigration, limit movement within New Zealand, enact regulations on social distancing and impose occasional lockdowns. Low transmission and case rates translated into high public support for the government’s response, which waned from October 2021 onwards. We attribute this initial high buy-in to a rigorous evidence-based policy and regulation approach and the clear and often empathetic communication by political leaders and other government officials. Nonetheless, New Zealand’s pandemic responses have directly visible, but also unintended, consequences such as the stigmatisation of some groups or the delay of surgeries. While enacting policies such as closing borders and requiring a ‘lockdown’ was swift and firm each time, and accompanied by an attempt to develop a disposition of care and empathy towards the public, more critical engagement with this approach and public health measures are warranted. This chapter will shine a light on the less-heard stories and consequences of the ’winner narrative’ often used in the New Zealand context to highlight the lived experiences, rifts in and consequences of the public health ordinances in New Zealand.
