Both the matters that emerged from the background of the Tapiola bridge accident and the recent individual cases of abuse of power should be taken seriously. They tell about the blurring of the line between right and wrong, a loss of morality.
Equally a month ago, a serious accident happened in Espoo’s Tapiola, when a temporary pedestrian bridge collapsed. 27 members of the school group were injured in the accident, most of them minors. They fell from a height of five meters to the ground.
The event had the ingredients for a much more serious accident. Even now, Turma shocked many Finns. Many are already building temporary access routes that cut through or border construction sites. Scaffolding structures that look like Huter do not inspire confidence in the layman’s eyes. Now the healthy skepticism got further confirmation.
Last week, the Accident Investigation Center (Otkes) published its preliminary report on the technical causes of the bridge accident. The design and implementation of the bridge, as well as safety supervision, had failed miserably once. No strength calculation had been done for the bridge. Bearing structures that were not strong enough had been used. The client, i.e. the city of Espoo, and the scaffolding supplier had inspected the bridge weekly, but monitoring temporary bridges is not part of any authority’s job description.
Finland is a trust society. The concept includes the idea not only of the mutual trust of citizens, but also of the operation of society’s control and verification mechanisms.
Temporary bridges are often people’s routes for a long time. In some cases, they may remain permanent. The knowledge that no one monitors these structures is shocking. Bridges should not collapse in Finland, and someone should clearly bear responsibility for the matter.
There are not enough officials to monitor everything that happens in society. It is neither possible nor appropriate. On the contrary, too much bureaucracy has been deliberately cut, and for example, doing business is based more and more on independent supervision.
The Tapiola accident shows that trust in regular self-monitoring is partly unfounded. When there is little or no external protection, operators are very tempted to go where the fence is lowest.
Every revealed neglect or abuse erodes confidence in the functioning of our society. The recent individual cases of abuse of power should also be taken seriously. They tell about the blurring of the line between right and wrong, a loss of morality.
Helsingin sanomat newspaper told on Thursday that the provincial government of Uusimaa decided to take the ambiguities related to the money use of the outgoing provincial director to the police for investigation. This had generously acquired services from the baseball club, of which he himself is the chairman.
Hufvudstadsbladet told on Tuesday, that the auditor of the Pohjola-Norden Support Foundation received a warning from the Audit Board of the Finnish Patent and Registration Board. The auditor had neglected his duty in sufficiently closely monitoring the foundation’s accounting and operations. The former general secretary of Pohjola-Norden could recycle the foundation’s money to his own accounts for years. The police investigation into the matter is at an end.
“
Trust is good, but gullibility is a risk.
Last days publicity has also been affected by the perceived impropriety of the Sdp’s long-term background influencer. Over the years, the well-connected man has mentored several of the party’s younger politicians and promised to promote their careers. The operation has also allegedly involved improper behavior. Because of this information, the background influencer had to resign from his day job as a special expert on Finnish economies. He did not have the conditions to continue in his position.
Incidents what unites them is that each of those suspected of wrongdoing has progressed in their careers to a rather autonomous position of power. It can be about being blinded by power, or at the very least a transition from acceptable to inappropriate – perhaps even illegal – behavior. They, too, would have needed people, structures and processes to restrain them, which would have made it possible to intervene in reprehensible activities in time.
Trust is good, but gullibility is a risk. Something has gone wrong if a person in power makes the mistake of feeling untouchable.
The author is acting head of HS. corresponding editor-in-chief.
#Column #omission #erodes #trust
