[ad_1]
It is a special year that is coming to an end. Also and especially for the Minister of Health, Alain Berset (48). Hardly any other Federal Councilor was as challenged in the crisis as the SP politician.
In early January, he first read about the coronavirus, even if it was still far away at the time, in a Chinese province. Only a few weeks later he suspected it would change our lives in such a fundamental way, also here in Switzerland, as he recorded in a new book.
The advantage of difficult knowledge
Berset, interviewed by Felix E. Müller, former editor-in-chief of “NZZ am Sonntag”, comments on a large number of questions. For example, how difficult were the discussions in the Federal Council.
Convincing the Federal Council was not easy, especially at the beginning of the pandemic. As Berset says, he had a knowledge advantage over the other federal advisers, which led to different opinions.
And it confirms that on April 27, after the first wave, when there was a demand for a full opening of all activities, it stopped. “I didn’t want to take responsibility,” Berset said openly.
The fight with the cantons
Of course, it does not say with whom Berset had to fight special ramos. Instead, he praises the discussion culture in the committee. Different opinions led to decisions that would be better accepted. But making decisions also takes more time than in a centralized system with a head of government.
Keystone
The Minister of Health, Alain Berset.
… the mistakes the federal government made:
“Anyone who preaches zero tolerance for mistakes in a crisis has not understood what a crisis is.”
… the criticism of the BAG and the Federal Council:
«Was the criticism exaggerated at times? Yes, that’s how I felt. “
… the reasons for the second wave:
“Let’s remember how we needed a break back then and how people enjoyed relaxation. They badly accepted the contact tracing. “
… about border closures in spring:
“In fact, we could have closed the border a few days earlier, although it is difficult to say what he would have done.”
… Swedish style:
“The Swedish approach was discussed internally. It is an option that we analyze and then discard. From an ethical point of view, this model is not justified by the greater number of deaths that is accepted, especially because we do not know the long-term consequences of the disease ”.
Berset defends the federal path that Switzerland chose after the first wave. Even if you are not always happy with how you can read between the lines. For example, when he says regarding the measures after the increase in the number of cases: “I was surprised that the large and energetic Canton of Zurich wanted to wait for the Federal Council.”
But he also had other experiences: the French-speaking part of Switzerland asked for a curfew. Berset says he was surprised that people asked to be locked up. For him, that was never an option, which is why he received nasty emails.
Partial lock possible
That is the zone of tension in which the Federal Council moved. The government has received many suggestions about what should be done better. “But responsibility is gladly delegated to the Federal Council,” Berset said. But he is convinced: “It is not possible to praise federalism in Sunday speeches and then throw it overboard at the first opportunity.”
The power of the Federal Council is not completely off the table. Because Berset makes it clear: if the situation worsens, a partial lockdown is still possible. (sf)
The book “How I Live the Crisis” by Felix E. Müller will be published on December 9 by NZZ Book.
