The Liberal Party’s Alfred Bjorlo is asking the Conservatives and ruling parties to step back before granting new pandemic powers to future governments.
- The government and the Conservative Party will amend the Infection Control Act and give future governments the opportunity to introduce isolation and quarantine measures without parliamentary approval
- The Liberal Party’s Alfred Bjorlo criticizes the change and believes the measures should be approved by parliament in the event of a future pandemic
- Several parties, including Frp, KrF, Rødt and Patientfokus, share Bjørlo and Venstre’s view.
- The government will review the infection control law after the final report of the Corona Committee. The opposition believes that they should wait before changing the law
- Governor Erlind Svardal-Boe believes Bjorlo’s criticism goes further, and points to infection control laws and requirements that already exist.
When Norway went into lockdown during the Corona pandemic, many very intrusive measures were taken.
The state can, among other things, force people into isolation and quarantine. This had to be approved by elected representatives in Parliament Temporary regulationsTemporary regulationsThese are rules or laws that are put in place for a short period of time, often to deal with a specific situation..
This may end with the next pandemic: now the government and the Conservative Party want change Swedish infection control lawSwedish infection control lawThis is the Norwegian law that deals with how to prevent and deal with infectious diseases.So that the future government can introduce such measures without visiting Parliament.
– There are authoritarian trends. They will give BureaucracyBureaucracyThis is a system of public servants and women who carry out the daily tasks of government. “A general mandate to take very intrusive actions in people’s lives,” says Finstris. Alfred Bjorlo To VG.
– On the left side, we are completely shaking our heads at how the ruling parties and the Conservative Party will continue, says Bjorlo.
The matter will be discussed in Parliament on Friday. It will be voted on next Tuesday.
Frp, KrF, Rødt and Patient Focus believe that Parliament should always approve such measures. SV says it’s very unfortunate to be presented like this Legal authorityLegal authorityThis is a law or part of a law that gives authorities the right to do something. Without safety valve.
The government has announced a general review of the Swedish Infection Control Act following the final report of the Corona Commission.
The opposition criticizes the government’s failure to wait for this before changing the law.
– There is one exception: the right. To me, this suggests that the Conservative Party is Norway’s old civil service party, which is very much in the pockets of bureaucracy. We elected officials must decide this and take responsibility. We can’t leave it to health bureaucrats, Bjorlo says.
– Come Quickly
Bjorlo believes that many measures have gone too far during the Corona pandemic.
– It came suddenly and there was a lot of uncertainty. Looking back, I think we wouldn’t have had to go as hard into forced isolation and quarantine as we did. “We have certainly gone far in keeping children and young people at home as we have for long periods,” he says.
– But the only thing is that we did it in a crisis situation. The other thing is that in peacetime we now give such a general mandate to the health bureaucracy, he says.
– Taking criticism too far
Erlend Svärdal Boye from Høyre has been acting Secretary of State for Bent Høie (H) during the pandemic. He is currently a member of the Health Committee in Parliament.
– I think Bjorlo takes his criticism further, Boy writes in a text message to VG.
He says the coronavirus measures were important to prevent the spread of infection, protecting vulnerable and at-risk people. Bui notes that the current infection control law already includes provisions that limit freedom of movement in the event of a new pandemic.
Among other things, regulations could be issued regarding quarantine upon entry, the closure of businesses and the adoption of a ban on meetings without visiting Parliament.
– It is now proposed that isolation and quarantine rules, which were only temporary and linked to the Covid-19 virus, will become general and permanent. Much more needs to be done before these powers can be activated, and the law requires that the measures not be too intrusive and not last unnecessarily long, Bowie wrote.
– He says that the consideration of protecting society and preventing infectious diseases that pose a danger to the public in crisis situations is well justified.
– It must have clear references
Labour’s health policy spokesman, Troels Vasvik, responds as follows:
Pandemic experiences have shown us that we must have clear rules for dealing with infection. “With this proposal, and the study in Parliament, we are ensuring the democratic consolidation of permanent legal provisions on quarantine that ensure adequate preparedness – not temporary provisions as happened during the Corona pandemic,” he wrote in a text message.
– He adds that by following the government’s proposal, this is being formulated into law with frameworks that can be tested in court.
“Organizer. Social media geek. General communicator. Bacon scholar. Proud pop culture trailblazer.”