Overall good judgment on how authorities deal with the corona pandemic.
After a year of pandemic, Norway is among the countries with the lowest mortality in Europe and the least financially affected. In a difficult situation for the country, the authorities quickly adapted and made decisions that decided how to do it, the crisis developed. At the same time, the authorities could not have been successful if the population did not support infection control measures.
Authorities as a whole coped well with the pandemic, but the investigation also revealed adverse conditions
"In the committee's assessment, the authorities as a whole coped well with the pandemic, but the investigation also revealed unfavorable conditions, especially in terms of emergency preparedness," says the head of the Crown Commission, Stener Kvinnsland.
Proper shutdown on March 12, 2020, but under time pressure, was greater than necessary.
When the intervention measures were implemented last March, there was little knowledge of the effect of infection control measures and great uncertainty about the spread of infection. The Commission believes that the decision was right, rather than waiting for more knowledge. The package of measures taken was poorly researched and poorly prepared.
- Already in mid-February, the Norwegian Health Directorate said that it could be treated as intervention measures. Nevertheless, no other ministries were involved and we find no sign that the social consequences of the measures were investigated prior to closure, says Stener Kvinnsland
The closure on March 12, 2020 put under pressure from the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Health and Welfare. The FHI held back and did not recommend any equally invasive measures. The Norwegian Directorate of Health made a formal decision on March 12.
The government lacked a plan to contain import infections in the fall of 2020
Creating exceptions for business travelers from abroad has been particularly important when it comes to controlling infection in the country.
- The government has created rules for people business travelers without good control systems, says Kvinnsland.
The scheme in which business travelers can prove themselves was an alternative to quarantine. In addition, employers were responsible for infection control measures and for living conditions that met quarantine requirements. The municipalities were overwhelmed with responsibility for overseeing compliance. When the government introduced stricter border controls at the end of 2020, it did not develop a tool to implement it. The border crossing registrations took place at the beginning with pen and paper.
The division of roles between the various bodies is unclear, but the actors worked well together
- The division of responsibilities between the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Norwegian Directorate of Health and NIPH seems unclear during dealing with a pandemicsays Kvinnsland.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare has entrusted the Norwegian Directorate of Health with the role of coordinator of health sector efforts, but has itself done a lot of coordination. FHI has gone beyond the role of a knowledge provider. The Norwegian Health Directorate was unable to fulfill its role as an authority on infection control. Despite the obscure roles, the three actors worked well together. The government paid too little attention to the municipalities. Municipalities were given much greater tasks during the pandemic than they could be prepared for.
The government was not prepared. It was known that there was a high probability that the equipment would be difficult to obtain
- The government knew that the pandemic was the national crisis it most likely was. It's a major setback that he wasn't prepared when the COVID-19 pandemic struck, says Kvinnsland.
While the Infectious Diseases Act offers the possibility of shutting down large sections of society, the government is not prepared to take such measures: we do not find any scenarios, plans or exercises. In the first phase of the pandemic, there was a critical shortage of infection control equipment.
- The government knew there was a high probability that the equipment would be difficult to obtain. Nevertheless, when COVID-19 arrived in Norway, the warehouses were empty, says Kvinnsland.
In 2015, it was determined that there may be a global shortage of infection control equipment. However, the government planned to buy the equipment in the world markets in the usual way.
What is in the Comprehensive Coronavirus Pandemic Commission (Koronakommisjonen) Report?
- We have 17 main messages and 60 learning points and recommendations in the report, says Kvinnsland. The committee's findings, assessments, conclusions and recommendations are summarized at the beginning of the report chapters.
The commission was set up by royal decree on April 24, 2020 to look at and learn from the COVID-19 outbreak in Norway. The commission was chaired by Professor Emeritus Stener Kvinnsland.
