It’s rare, but not unprecedented. The committee on budgetary execution’s examination of the Court of Auditors’ special report on the management of the Luxosys project was entrusted to two rapporteurs: (DP) and (CSV). Faced with a spectacular budget overrun--€300m spent against €170m voted in the financing law--and chaotic management, the opposition parties at the time had called for a commission of enquiry, a request that was not, however, adopted by parliament.

Same causes, same effects? At the end of the second meeting devoted to the funding of large-scale testing, two rapporteurs were appointed: one for the majority, the other for the opposition. (CSV) will represent the majority, while (déi Gréng) has been appointed for the opposition.

The LSAP and the DP were unable to field candidates, as both parties were in charge of the relevant ministries: the ministry of health for the LSAP, headed by , and the ministry of research for the DP, headed by . As a reminder, large-scale testing had initially been a research project before becoming a health project.

The search for a balanced report

“Two rapporteurs in order to achieve a balanced report,” believes (DP), a member of the committee. Whilst the meeting on 24 February had been rather tense, according to the testimony of several MPs who refused to break the secrecy of the deliberations to specify who had attacked whom and for what reasons, the meeting on 10 March was calmer. “What had to be said was said on 24 February.”

Members looked at phases 2 and 3. Before them, the Court of Auditors expressed reservations about the exclusivity obtained by Laboratoires Réunis luxembourgeois (LRL), which it considers to be the consequence of the transformation of the invitation to tender for phase 2 into a negotiated contract, such a structure “mechanically” favouring the renewal of the incumbent service provider.

The Court of Auditors also highlighted the margins achieved by LRL, which were higher than the estimates made when the contract was concluded thanks to the use of pooling techniques for diagnostics, a method which, to put it simply, reduced the invoice by three quarters. Finally, the court expressed regret to MPs that it had not had access to the information needed to ensure that the key performance indicators were in line with the public authorities’ expectations.

Placebo effect

On the substance, Schockmel does not deny that the system was over-designed, particularly in terms of the number of positive diagnoses recorded. However, he does not deny that phase 1 may have had a placebo effect on the population by reducing its potential degree of panic.

Now the two rapporteurs will have to write a joint report, which will be far from easy. At the time, the CSV, then in opposition, was highly critical of the scheme. Now that majorities have changed, will the CSV want to trigger a crisis with their current coalition partners, the DP, by calling for a commission of enquiry?

The answer will be seen in a few weeks.

This article was originally published in .