NZ First has invoked the first use of the “agree to disagree” provisions in the coalition government, saying it disagrees with elements of the government’s decisions on an expanded Covid-19 Inquiry.

NZ First leader Winston Peters issued a press release setting out the party’s position after Brooke van Velden released the form the inquiry would take.

Peters said while NZ First agreed with the scope of a proposed ‘second phase’ of the inquiry, it disagreed strongly with the decision to complete the current Royal Commission into Covid-19 inquiry first and to keep its chair Tony Blakely in place.

Van Velden said the Covid-19 inquiry would now take part in two stages: the existing inquiry would finish its work and report back in November.

A “second phase” of the inquiry would then begin with a new chair and new commissioners, which would have wider terms of reference. It would report back with recommendations by February 2026.

“It will focus on matters of ongoing public concern including vaccine efficacy and safety, the extended lockdowns in Auckland and Northland, and the extent of disruption to New Zealanders’ health, education, and business,” van Velden said.

Peters said NZ First had always wanted the current inquiry scrapped completely and could not agree to continuing it, saying it was “nothing more than a Labour Party political tool, being used to craft a message through its lack of scope and lack of suitability of the commissioners.

“We believe that ‘phase one’ of the Royal Commission is simply a continuation of the current inquiry, which is far too narrow in scope and remains compromised by the current Chair’s direct involvement with the previous government’s administration and direct planning of the Covid pandemic response.”

He said that led to a perception of bias which would undermine the credibility of that part of the inquiry.

The former Labour Government set up the Royal Commission into Covid-19 in December 2022, setting its focus as looking at what could be learned to improve the response for future pandemics.

That narrow scope was criticised strongly at the time by National, Act and NZ First who accused Labour of trying to dodge accountability for the decisions they had made.

A broader inquiry was included in the coalition agreements of both Act and NZ First.

Van Velden said more than 13,000 submissions had been received from the public during the consultation earlier this year on the need to expand the terms of reference.

The new commissioners and detailed terms of reference would be announced in August.

The coalition agreements include dispute resolution clauses which require the parties to “work together and in good faith” to reach agreement with each other and try to get consensus.

The agreements – and the Cabinet Manual – provide for the parties to agree to disagree in relation to issues on which parties wish to maintain different positions in public.

In such a case, attempts to get consensus have to be tried first, and it has to be dealt with at the leadership level.

Claire Trevett is the NZ Herald’s political editor, based at Parliament in Wellington. She started at the NZ Herald in 2003 and joined the Press Gallery team in 2007. She is a life member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.