In short, Thursday 22 September
Cycle path. School. Waiting time for new medicines. This is today’s card post!
Debate
This is a discussion post. Opinions in the text are the responsibility of the writer.
We want Veivesenet on a cycle revolution!
Director of Roads in the Norwegian Public Roads Administration Ingrid Dahl Hovland writes on 12 September in Aftenposten about Norway’s failed cycling initiative. It is good to hear that Veivesenet at least acknowledges the problem.
Today, many parents are afraid to let their children ride or walk alone. The proportion of young people who cycle has almost halved since the 1990s. Veivesenet must take its share of the blame for that. They promised to build 30 kilometer cycle path in Oslo by 2025, but they are miles behind. In 2020, they built a whopping 90 meters.
For comparison, we rolled in Oslo just last year out 20 kilometers with new and upgraded cycle path. In total, the capital has reached 260 kilometers of cycleways.
Since 2014, the proportion who experience Oslo as a safe cycling city has more than tripled, and cycling has increased by 50 percent. About 9 out of 10 support Oslo’s cycling initiative.
We would like Veivesen to take part in this cycling revolution! But then the goal cannot be to get the car out as quickly as possible, as the state’s socio-economic analyzes often unilaterally emphasize. It must be to get people and goods out in an efficient and environmentally friendly way, as required by the national goal of zero growth in car traffic in the big city.
The national transport plan (NTP) has the last years to be expelled for a big wish, which consists of black asphalt. The government is now announcing severe cuts. Perhaps it is an opportunity for new thinking? In Copenhagen, once upon a time, cycling was primarily a virtue of necessity: in the absence of money, cycle paths were the cheapest and most efficient.
Now let’s look at Copenhagen! As cycling councilor for Oslo, I want everyone from eight to 80 years of age to experience cycling safely. The goal is a continuous cycle network of 530 kilometres. Over the next four years, Oslo has therefore set aside over billions for cycling infrastructure. We would like to have the National Road Administration and the government on board. It will be good for public health, the environment and traffic safety in the cities.
Sirin Stav, Environment and Transport Council in Oslo (MDG)
Sweden cannot be compared to Norway
Minister of State Tonje Brenna (Ap) has been on a political Swedish trade. It went as it often does: buying cheap goods that are not needed. Sweden’s independent school policy is miles away from Norway’s.
Despite the fact that the Social Democrats have been in power for eight years in Sweden, they have not managed to introduce a dividend ban for independent schools. However, Norway has a dividend ban, which was also tightened by the previous government. It’s bra. The school’s income must go to running the school and not to the owners. Could the minister teach the Swedes this?
Our schools are nonprofit and non-commercial. On the other hand, we want to be part of a common and diverse school offer.
Brenna repeats that there has been a massive privatization of Norwegian schools. The reality is that local politicians, not least from the Labor Party, have decided to build large schools and close down small ones. This has resulted in parents wanting independent schools. Parental initiative is not privatization. It is a manifestation of parental rights which are rooted in human rights.
Brenna concludes by saying that a prerequisite for small differences and high trust is a strong community school. This is true as long as it includes independent schools. Our schools have the same upbringing as public schools, to teach our children respect, tolerance and diversity. Had Brenna shown understanding to parents and students who are different from herself, it would have contributed to increased trust in society.
Jorunn Hallaråker Heggelund, Friskolenes Kontaktforum (FK)
Misleading about Danish and Norwegian waiting times
Aftenposten writes on 12 September that Denmark is significantly quicker to adopt new medicines than Norway and that the waiting time is twice as long here. The figures are taken from a study done for the international pharmaceutical industry association EFPIA. Here, Denmark will be a presenter among the healthiest countries in Europe.
The figures from Denmark are misleading. They show when the medicines are available in pharmacies and can be used by patients who can pay for themselves. The Norwegian figures, on the other hand, show when the same medicines are available and publicly financed for all Norwegian patients. The reality is that we do not know how long Danish patients have to wait, but we do know that it is significantly longer than the figures in the EFPIA report reflect.
Pharmaceutical companies set a high price. Therefore, both we and the Danes carry out a valuation to find the price the public can pay. Is the effect worth the high price? The hospitals use our valuation in their negotiations.
The Danes are now assessing their system. We got our evaluation last year. Together with the hospitals, we work to improve our joint work in giving Norwegian patients faster access to new medicines.
Einar Andreassen, Acting Area Director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency