from the outset, it seemed that Stockholm trafikborgarråd Daniel Helldén (MP) had acted in an inappropriate way.
When trafikdirektören Jonas Eliasson had to leave his post just before christmas was the official reason that the ”arrangements for cooperation between the traffic and trafiknämnden need to be developed”. But according to DN's sources was the real reason that Eliasson did not want to adapt the studies and the conclusions after helldén's wishes.
It would in that case be about the politicisation of the apolitical management. So, it should not go to.
Daniel Helldén denied the DN's data. And claimed that the decision to move on Eliasson entirely was stadsdirektörens.
delivers Helldén, however, a number of remarkable claims about the former trafikdirektören. It miljöpartistiska borgarrådet claim that Eliasson selected by helldén's old partner in city Hall to tie the him: ”the social democrats hand-picked a person that was in line with their policies. They politicised the position of the director in the city.” Helldén, claiming that he ”heard that they did this to prevent the work to make Stockholm into a climate-smart city”. And that Eliasson was appointed by a process which did not comply with the regulatory framework.
at the moment it looks just like that Helldén want to have a förvaltningsledning that goes in his leash, which delivers the facts and analyses according to his whims.
When he gets questions about what he has for the basis for their claims respond Helldén: ”I believe that you should also understand that some things you learn, you can't pass on.”
worked Jonas Eliasson, therefore, that a socialist overcoat. But he himself had nothing to do with trafikdirektören withdrawn. It does not appear very credible.
If Helldén believe that there are good practical reasons for that Eliasson had to go, he should report them. At the moment it looks just like that trafikborgarrådet want to have a förvaltningsledning that goes in his leash, which delivers the facts and analyses according to his whims.