Coronakommissionens slutsatser om svensk senfärdighet ligger nära det jag skrivit tidigare, på denna blogg och i andra sammanhang. Betänkandet innehåller många andra saker, men när det gäller bristen på tidigt agerande finns det skäl att fundera på orsakerna.
Några av mina tidigare texter tar upp det ämnet:
https://mengstrom.blogspot.com/2021/04/varfor-underskattade-sverige-pandemin.html
https://mengstrom.blogspot.com/2021/01/tidig-varning-ar-avgorande-for-god.html
https://mengstrom.blogspot.com/2020/12/den-langsamma-starten-forvarrade.html
https://mengstrom.blogspot.com/2020/09/kriskansliet-tande-inte-varningslamporna.html
https://mengstrom.blogspot.com/2020/09/folkhalsomyndigheten-bromsade-starten.html
Jag har tidigare hänvisat till vad professor Bengt Sundelius skrivit om detta. Hans rekommendationer tål att upprepas:
"Policy makers do not like to think about potentially nasty and as yet purely hypothetical events since it is psychologically unsettling and because there are so many other pressing issues. However, if they do not lead the way in breaking through the natural tendency for organizations to ignore risks by demonstrating personal and sustained commitment to organizational preparedness, they should not expect much to happen in this regard."
och
"Consistently asking for candid reporting from advisers, including worst-case scenarios, is essential but not sufficient. Policy makers must also show by their attitudes and actions that they value those who bring them bad news or have the courage to argue unpopular viewpoints."