Among other things, the working group sees investment in the economy as good in the Swedish coronal line. It also considers it fundamentally right to rely on voluntary restrictions.
In Sweden, the working group that evaluated the government’s corona policy believes that the line based on voluntary restrictions on people was fundamentally correct. However, the government reacted too slowly when a pandemic broke out in the winter of 2020.
Unlike other European countries, Sweden did not impose closures and other strict restrictions when the pandemic began to intensify in the spring and winter of 2020. Instead, Sweden resorted to voluntary recommendations on, among other things, safety intervals and good hand hygiene.
The task force would have needed quarantine and closure of the shops
In the absence of a plan from the government to protect the elderly and other at-risk groups, more efforts should have been made to slow the spread of the coronavirus earlier, the working group assessed in its final report.
Among other things, the working group considers it a mistake not to call on those who came from Italy to be quarantined after the pandemic spread to Europe. In the beginning, the worst situation was in Italy.
In addition, restaurants, shopping malls and other public spaces should have been closed and major events restricted, the working group believes.
In the early months of the pandemic, Sweden’s infection rates were among the worst in Europe and quite different from the relatively moderate rates of infection in the other Nordic countries.
“Government relied too much on public health authority”
The evaluation team also complains that the government seems to have become too dependent on the Public Health Agency’s estimates.
– The Agency’s evaluations are basically carried out by one person, the Director of the Agency. It is not a good enough system for decision-making in a social crisis, the working group writes.
In Sweden, the face of coronary policy was the state epimologist in particular Anders Tegnell.
The working group also criticizes the agency for its unclear communication.
The government is praised for handling the financial side of the crisis. A quick and strong investment was the right strategy, the team believes.