The Corona Commission's final report contains harsh criticism of how the government and the Public Health Agency in particular acted at the beginning of the pandemic.
In principle, however, the Commission considers that the Swedish strategy with a focus on volunteering has been fundamentally right.
The Commission also writes that the economic measures decided by the government to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic were both rapid and resolute.
However, the opposite applies to infection control measures, especially in the spring of 2020. According to the Commission, the Swedish Public Health Agency is responsible for Sweden taking too few and insufficient measures to limit the spread of infection.
The then Director General Johan Carlsson was appointed as responsible for the defensive stance.
In addition, the general advice given by the authority was far too vague and vague.
The government governs the country, the commission's chairman Mats Melin emphasized during Friday's press conference.
But the then Prime Minister Stefan Löfven relied uncritically on the Public Health Agency, which was allowed to hold the baton during the first months of the corona crisis.
The government should have given directives to the authority to correct the course chosen.
A key issue in the Commission's criticism is that the measures taken should have been taken into account in order for the pandemic to develop in such a comprehensive direction as actually did.
The Corona Commission calls it the precautionary principle, or principle of action, and wants it to be raised as a guiding principle for future crises.
It makes clear demands on the parties involved to act quickly and forcefully instead of waiting and seeing.
The Corona Commission also wants the government to take a clearer lead in a crisis situation.
It should have done so during the pandemic.
The legal space exists.
At the same time, the Commission wants a special body for crisis management directly under the government.
The Corona Commission also airs its dissatisfaction with the government's unwillingness to provide information to the Commission during the work.
In the next crisis, the documentation must be improved, the commission says.
Swedish preparedness and ability to act in crises is clearly marked by significant shortcomings.
The criticism directed at the government today is reminiscent of that directed at the then government after the 2004 tsunami disaster. The so-called Disaster Commission criticized Göran Persson's government for both lack of preparedness and belated action.
The question is what lessons the government and parliament draw from this time from what has happened.
However, one thing is clear.
Both Stefan Löfven and Johan Carlson are probably relieved that they have left the public stage.
If they had remained in office today, they would have had to answer a series of difficult questions.
But despite the harsh criticism in the Commission's report, it is far from certain that pandemic management will be an election issue.
Stefan Löfven has resigned and been replaced by Magdalena Andersson.
Most voters have left the pandemic behind and think that Sweden, after all, coped with the crisis quite well.
The political opposition will surely criticize the government for lack of leadership, but when the pandemic raged at its worst, they all sat quietly in the boat.
Their support then for the government and the Public Health Agency makes it difficult today to suddenly change feet.
Read more about browser support
The browser is not supported
SVT does not support playback in your browser.
We therefore recommend that you switch to a different browser.
Read more about browser support
"The precautionary principle should have been applied" - Hear the President of the Commission on the government's actions at the beginning of the pandemic.
Photo: Jonas Ekströmer / TTKeywords: