Finally, Sweden has realized that crises require political leadership.

The Swedish close religious relationship with science has stood in the way of political action in the face of the crown pandemic.

Debate

This is a discussion post. The post is written by an external contributor and the quality is assured by BT’s discussion department. Opinions and analyzes are those of the author.

Spring 2020 established millions of Swedes glued to the TV screen every day One minute later, representatives of the four major health and safety authorities gathered for a joint press conference, where the public was notified of the latest state of the pandemic coronary.

The press conference became a guiding star in the dark, a secular devotion, and a landmark in an otherwise strange everyday life. Faceless bureaucrats (read: Anders Tegnell) became celebrities overnight and in no time gained an unreasonable, and certainly unwanted, amount of power.

With the exception of a few press conferences with the Minister of Social Affairs, Lena Hallengren, and a televised address to the people from the prime minister’s office, there were few politicians in sight in Sweden in the spring of 2020..

At the same time Bent Høie, Erna Solberg and Monica Mæland faced the crisis and the measures with a firm hand in Norway. We felt that some worker authorities supported him; Sometimes Health Director Bjørn Guldvåg and NIPH Director Camilla Stoltenberg had a few words to say.

But the ministers were the outside face. And we quickly realized that many of the measures could not be justified in the investigation, but had a more political nature, where our political leaders had to consider many issues and the lives to protect, despite a lack of knowledge and uncertainty. about the virus.

Political ineptitude As we saw in Sweden, it does not come from reluctance or weak politicians. No, the background of the Swedish Public Health Authority’s explanation of Messiah is the long tradition of relying on public administration and partly separating issues and politics. This is reflected in a kind of superstition that all decisions must be scientifically justified.

Therefore, from a Swedish perspective, it was not natural for Stefan Löfven and his ministers to take the initiative at the beginning of the pandemic. The idea is that whoever is more knowledgeable should make a statement. And then the Public Health Authority became a natural actor, unlike most European countries where politicians quickly took the lead.

Remains We do not know much about the coronavirus, but knowledge is increasing day by day. Given how complex and pervasive the virus is affecting society, it is neither right nor fair for a single authority to be at the forefront, despite extensive knowledge in this field. A virus that affects all sectors of society is much more than epidemiology and infection control.

Now we see that the infection rates go back up. Swedish politicians have woken up and understood that it is “time” to act. The public health authority has lost its hero status and Stefan Löfven is seen more frequently at press conferences. Unlike this spring, when the Public Health Authority and the National Board of Health and Welfare faced the crisis, we now have the impression that their role is, to a greater extent, advisers to the government. Perhaps as it should have been from the beginning.

We can only speculate on how discussions have followed the Swedish government, but in the end we ministers must be impatient and become understood that advice and professional knowledge must also be balanced with political demands and actions.

After a spring With completely different Nordic crown strategies, the November measurements appear quite similar in Oslo and Stockholm.

Now we just hope they work.