Finland has so far managed the corona epidemic quite well. All the while, however, a number of contradictions have bubbled beneath the surface. They are coming to the surface now that the moment of need is greatest, writes Jussi Pillinen, the forerunner of HS’s policy editorial, in his comment.
Last days have been wildly monitored in a coronary pandemic. The main reason, of course, is the disease itself: the self-transformation drives the disease curves almost vertically upwards. In hospital corridors, nurses, doctors, and facility caregivers do what they can.
Finnish society is resilient in the crisis and is unlikely to collapse. Still, the functioning of public transport, food supply or pharmacies must be considered in the face of morbidity figures. In healthcare, the burden is greatest.
In many ways, Finland is now experiencing the greatest moment of distress in a pandemic: the point where the carrying capacity of individuals and institutions to take action is most demanded. This is also the time when leadership and leading the way are most needed.
It is therefore confusing that Finland’s interest rate management has now begun to resemble a car driving a Macau slow motion film in a crash test. The hood of the strategy crumbles, the pieces fly on the walls and everyone sees that there is no one behind the wheel.
“
Throughout the pandemic setup, a number of contradictions have bubbled, with much of the strife arising from mediation.
So far Based on the results, the fight against the pandemic in Finland has been at least moderately successful. Finns have not died as much from the disease as in many other countries, the economy is growing and children and young people have been given priority in decisions.
This result has been achieved through the government’s “hybrid strategy”, the core of which is a kind of in-flight adjustment. Finland has not poured its methods into concrete, but they have been changed according to the situation – often with little foresight, confusingly and spectacularly arguing in last-minute “government negotiations”. Most beautifully, the pandemic in Finland has been combated agilely.
Throughout the pandemic setup, a number of contradictions have bubbled, with much of the strife arising from mediation. Of these, the key relates to how the epidemic should basically be approached: with a precautionary principle that avoids long-term covidia and other unknown risks, or pragmatically?
Many health authorities believe that dreams of preventing the spread of the disease are futile: the most important thing is that hospitals operate and prevent the most serious cases of the disease, but not all of them. The Department of Health and Welfare (THL) and hospital districts have largely represented this view.
On the other hand, there are independent experts in particular who believe that the pandemic should have been suppressed – that is, trying to keep the infections down as low as possible. Echoes of the view have been heard especially in the outputs of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (STM). The political face of a tougher line has been the Minister of Basic Services Krista Kiuru (sd). He has been pushing tight locks until the last few days.
The division is not black and white, but all authorities are instantly adjusting and optimizing the carrying capacity of hospitals – in the true spirit of a hybrid strategy. The STM, which has followed a strict line, has also often predicted the worsening of the disease correctly.
However, there is a contradiction.
“
THL, STM, municipalities and hospital districts have changed from neutral actors to parties to tug of war.
Finland the biggest challenge in pandemic management has been that while the contradiction is of a fundamental nature, it has not been clearly addressed in the strategies developed by the government. The result has been a constant tug-of-war over which direction to adjust in “government negotiations” at any given time.
Such polyphony is, of course, part of politics. However, a more difficult consequence of the arrangement has been that THL, STM, municipalities and hospital districts have shifted from neutral actors to parties in tug-of-war. In recent days, they have starved each other more and more openly, even in public.
The still-life peak so far reached Tuesday when the Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health Kirsi Varhila accused BTI in an interview The municipalities of Uusimaa “for non-compliance with the procedure under the Communicable Diseases Act”, ie in practice for violating the law.
Municipalities announced earlier have to drive down quarantines as well as tracing infections that had been made virtually impossible by the avalanche of omicrons. STM, for its part, has emphasized the importance of these in order to control infections.
“At the grassroots level, we now have to implement a change in strategy that is not nationally aligned,” the doctor in charge of infectious diseases in the city of Helsinki. Sanna Isosomppi said in an interview with HS.
The chaotic situation was made by STM’s strategy director Pasi Pohjola in turn said in an interview with HS Helsinki is actually following the national strategy. On Tuesday, therefore, the STM was both accused of violating the law and said they were acting in accordance with the instructions.
The fact that part of the country brings its own spice to chaos administrative rights have begun to suspend the closure decisions of sports facilities made by regional administrative agencies. When omikron gnaws at the strategy, the pieces fly in the air, and the beak just crunches.
In the eyes of the people the end result is very embarrassing. At the darkest time of the pandemic, there seem to be at least two different lines of action in Finland. Different authorities make demands on each other, and many of them are contradictory, some kind of transfer of responsibilities or sheer sub-optimization.
The speech to the citizen is masked by the quarrel between the technocrats.
Read more: STM rolled out and regions no longer agree to follow its recommendations – yet they require national guidance
Public prosecution Instead, Finland needed a leadership that looks ahead, mentally takes over the gloomy situation and can ignore the old truths shattered by the practical situation.
Prime minister Sanna Marin (sd) stressed in an interview with HS over the weekend the importance of polyphony.
“We would live in a very different society if all the authorities always agreed. It would be an authoritarian state, ”Marin said.
At the same time, the Prime Minister stated that his work has been “re-examined” so that there is also time to deal with the tightening world situation, for example.
One may ask whether this was a wise decision. Marin’s withdrawal has created a power vacuum that is now being filled with an escalating quarrel over the key contradictions of the pandemic. Minister Kiuru is leading the pandemic work, but he does not appear to be a unifying force but one of the parties to the dispute.
It may also be that even the prime minister could not have prevented the latest chaos. Still, the situation is not sustainable: Finland needs a new direction out of the omicron. Behind the prime minister looking elsewhere, the beak of the car just crunches and the picture on the screen is wilder day by day. If something doesn’t change, there may soon be only a harsh rapids and a deep emergency left.
.
#Comment #Finland #living #worst #moment #epidemic #slowdown #car #crash #sees #wheel
