KU: Did the government rule the kingdom during the pandemic?

KU President Karin Enström (M) wants answers to many questions. Stock Photography.Picture: Pontus Lundahl / TT

Depending on the form of government, the government governs the kingdom and directs the activities of the state administration.

But moderates wonder if this has really been the case. In a lengthy report to KU, the leader of the party group in the Riksdag, Tobias Billström, questions whether the government has made any decisions on the Swedish strategy or whether the decisions have in practice been delegated to the authorities, read the Agency for Public health.

KU moderate chair Karin Enström is so far cautious with some conclusions.

– Take the holistic approach to strategy and there it is important to get answers about exactly who has ruled and how it has gone. That is why it is important that we do this review. We are working, we have no ready answers at KU, the first hearings this week will be an important part of making the review work as accurate as possible, he tells TT.

The Crown Commission is running in parallel, and KU normally awaits further reviews.

– Yes, it is clear that what they arrive at is important, and there we have a lot to gather from their first partial report, but KU has a special task to review the government. The Crown Commission has a much broader mandate, we review the actions of the government and the Prime Minister, says Enström.

– The pandemic is not over, this is a job that must continue, he says.

KU will now try to get an answer to the question of what strategy decisions the government made in that case, when they were made, and whether the strategy was updated during the trip.

The Swedish Public Health Agency (FHM) has played a central role throughout the pandemic. From there the government received facts and proposals for measures. At the same time, FHM has been questioned by researchers both internationally and in Sweden.

KU wants answers on whether the government has ensured that the information is correct and to what extent it has evaluated facts and data from various sources and whether it has acted on warning signs and assessments from various actors.

Has the Swedish strategy been the same from the beginning? In recent times, it has been said that it aims to limit the spread of the infection as much as possible, while at the beginning of the pandemic it was said that it aimed to limit it to a level that medical care can handle. Partly two different goals, not completely compatible, according to the moderates.

KU should also try to get an answer on whether it is the precautionary principle that applies or a wait-and-see mentality. Another question is whether the work on the pandemic law really got underway on time.

In addition to basic questions about strategy and whether the government controls the authorities or vice versa, the University of Copenhagen must review a number of statements from the Prime Minister and individual ministers. These include Stefan Löfven’s statement on the responsibility of the regions in testing and statements by Foreign Minister Ann Linde in a German television interview on Swedish strategy.

KU generally strives for unity. The question is whether it will be possible in this complicated question of how the government has handled the pandemic.

– I do not anticipate the review, but it is clear that I, as president, hope that we can stick together. These are very important problems that have affected all residents of Sweden, says Karin Enström (M).

The initial hearings on Thursday and Friday are aimed at the competent authorities, the National Board of Health and Welfare, the Public Health Agency (FHM) and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB), as well as the organization of municipalities and regions of Sweden (SKR). .

KU does not review the authorities, but only the government and ministers, but the CEOs of these authorities are called upon to provide a basis for the review.