From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland

The Finnish government led by Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party) submitted no fewer than three legislative proposals to Parliament for approval on Thursday. For this reason, Interior Minister Mari Rantanen (Finns Party), who led their preparation and presented the matter in Parliament, remarked that “we are having a kind of immigration super Thursday.”

The purpose of the legislative proposals is to streamline Finland’s immigration policy by introducing a citizenship test, intensifying the deportation and entry bans of those residing in the country illegally, and making use of the opportunities provided by the EU’s migration and asylum pact.

The aim of the citizenship test is to ensure that Finnish citizenship is not granted without the applicant having familiarity with Finnish society. However, the level of knowledge required to pass the test is not particularly demanding, as passing the multiple-choice exam only requires correctly answering seven out of ten questions.

According to the Interior Minister, the government “expects individuals seeking Finnish citizenship to be proactive in acting in the manner required by law.” For this reason, integration funding will in the future be more precisely directed toward teaching Finland’s national languages—which can only be welcomed.

Regarding deportations, the government aims to ensure that deportation decisions can be carried out more efficiently and quickly than at present. In addition, endangering national security will be added as grounds for an entry ban—this will also apply to individuals seeking to enter Finland from within the EU.

The third change is mainly technical. It implements the EU’s migration and asylum pact, which will in the future make it possible to transfer the asylum process to a country outside the Union. This too is an excellent development—provided the future arrives before it is too late.

* * *

In my view, all of the government’s proposals yesterday are good and necessary—if not outright essential—conditions for transforming immigration from its current burden into something beneficial for Finland. Therefore, it is worth observing how Parliament responds to them.

It is, of course, to be expected that members of Parliament from the far left will react negatively to at least some of the proposals. If and when this happens, it will not change the image already formed of the Left Alliance and the Greens as a “fifth column” marching within our country.

More interesting, however, is to see what happens within the government itself—especially within the parliamentary groups of the Swedish People’s Party (RKP) and the National Coalition Party—as well as within the main opposition parties, the Social Democratic Party and the Centre Party. Will there also be, and if so how many, individuals willing to participate in the activities of a “fifth column”?

* * *

As an aside, and loosely related to the topic: Member of Parliament Joakim Vigelius (Finns Party) made a rather apt remark on social media. He stated that “it is quite a paradox that first low-income people are attracted from around the world to Finland to be low-income, and then people wonder how much low-income status has increased.”

This observation also appears to be shared by Professor Heikki Hiilamo, who stated that immigration is “a significant factor” in the increase in poverty. “There has been a change in the labor market, with more and more immigrants working in low-wage occupations.”

In addition, the professor noted that the situation is also affected by the fact that immigrants largely live in big cities, such as Helsinki, where housing costs are relatively high. What more is there to add, except that public authorities in Finland actively encourage this by offering various non-reciprocal benefits to citizens of other countries as well.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Perspectives on Immigration Restrictions in Finland and the U.S.
Finland to Cut Off Taxpayer Money for Immigration
Can Europe Learn from Finland´s and Spain’s Contrasting Immigration Policies?

A Professor’s Ten-Point Plan to Fix Europe’s Immigration Policy

Finnish emeritus Professor Vesa Kanniainen has made a list related to immigration policy.

1. The EU member states must abandon the universal social security model throughout Europe.

2. The processing of asylum applications must be moved outside Europe.

3. Financial aid must be stopped for those countries of origin of refugees that refuse to take back their citizens who have not been granted asylum and whose return would therefore not violate the Geneva Convention.

4. Those who have received a negative asylum decision must be required to cooperate and be housed in return centers while waiting for their journey home.

5. Crossing European borders by land, sea, or air must be criminalized when a person does not have a positive asylum decision or valid travel documents.

6. Transport vehicles (such as boats in the Mediterranean) financed by criminal organizations must be confiscated.

7. International cooperation with various countries must be strengthened in order to relocate refugees outside Europe.

8. Visits by those who have been granted asylum to their home country must be prohibited.

9. Family reunifications of asylum seekers must be prohibited or frozen.

10. All foreigners who have received an unconditional or conditional prison sentence must be deported, regardless of how long they have lived in an EU country.

I think the professor’s list is quite good. So good, in fact, that it should be implemented as it is. For that reason, all its points should serve as guiding principles both in the humanitarian decisions of the current European Commission and in Finland’s immigration policy program after 2027.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two Men Sentenced for Raping Underage Girls
Is Immigration Driving the Nordic Countries Apart?
Why is Somalia unwilling to meet Finland’s conditions for continuing development cooperation?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
https://professorinajatuksia.blogspot.com/2025/11/vesa-kanniaisen-lista-kannattaisi.html

Why Is the Case of Issam Rafil, Convicted of a Sexual Offense in Finland, Important for Britain?

I begin this text with a court decision that I hope will gain attention in Britain, particularly at 10 Downing Street. The quote is from Finland's largest daily newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat, and reads as follows: "Helsinki District Court sentenced Issam Rafil, born in 1984, to three years and four months in prison for two rapes."

I mention this because, although such crimes—occurring with increasing frequency—are often left unspoken in Finland, they occasionally make their way into the country's leading media outlets. This was also the case with the aforementioned rapist. In this matter, the real winner is, above all, freedom of speech, which the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has recently sought to curtail (see also this text).

More generally, Finland finds itself in a difficult position as sexual crimes are rising rapidly. According to the country's statistics agency, approximately 6,700 sexual offenses were reported between January and September 2024. Of these, around 1,400 were classified as rapes under the new sexual offense law, marking a 40% increase compared to the previous year.

According to a police inspector, the high numbers can partly be explained by the fact that sexual crimes occurring online easily create spikes in police statistics. On the internet, the number of victims can quickly rise to hundreds.

I believe this explanation is accurate. Nevertheless, I also think that certain cultural factors play a role in this issue. For this reason, I find it highly necessary that Petteri Orpo's government program for 2024–2027 includes as many as 32 measures. These include learning the Finnish language, gaining employment, familiarizing oneself with Finnish society, and learning to adhere to its rules. In relation to the theme I am addressing here, the last of these is the most important.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges
Finnish Immigration Policy Aims to Maximize Benefits and Minimize Drawbacks
The UK Prime Minister Took a One-Sided Stance on the Country's Protests

Immigrants, Gangs, Decisions, and Self-Interest

The Finnish national broadcaster Yle reported unexpectedly yesterday that Pietarsaari is grappling with gang, drug, and violence issues connected to individuals of immigrant backgrounds, as well as ties to the capital city and Sweden. According to the report, 15 percent of the town’s population are immigrants.

This is not entirely new, as already nine and a half years ago, the local police stated that, "The reception center came about six years ago. These days, we almost don’t have a single case where someone with a foreign background isn’t involved."

At that time — in 2015 — the issue came to light because a 17-year-old youth of foreign background had stabbed two other young people. He was caught.

In Yle's recent article, 14-year-old Erdi from Pietarsaari said, "There are a lot of young people here who want to be in a gang… They act a bit like gangsters. They think they’re tough, but they’re not."

A local youth specialist, meanwhile, described young men who came to Pietarsaari through Sweden, following people, issuing threats, and "causing a stir. The youth talk about how they’re not from here. Now they’ve disappeared from the streets."

* * *

Yle’s news report confirmed that the immigration policies practiced in Finland and Sweden have been disastrous for the native population, and their negative consequences are not limited to large cities. For this reason, it would also be prudent for voters in Pietarsaari to remember that the current government, led by the National Coalition Party and the Finns Party, is the first to attempt to address these issues.

In fact, steps have already been taken, with the following immigration-related changes implemented: the introduction of border procedures, amendments to laws to prevent circumvention of entry regulations, a reduction of reception allowances to the minimum allowed by the Constitution and the Reception Directive, and stricter requirements for obtaining citizenship.

Starting next year, international protection will also be redefined as temporary. Additionally, administrative reforms have been initiated to strengthen these efforts.

And that’s not all—the government program includes further planned improvements to immigration policy. If these are implemented, it is likely that the flow of immigrants from developing countries to Finland will slow, and those who do arrive will have a stronger motivation to integrate into our society. That would be in everyone’s best interest.

* * *

It should be noted, however, that if Finns vote in the next parliamentary elections in 2027 to bring the Social Democrats back into government and relegate the Finns Party to the opposition, it is likely that the country will revert to the old immigration policies, which have been causing increasingly severe problems. This appears to be the trajectory based on current party support polls.

There is also a risk that the government could collapse due to internal conflicts and members of parliament prioritizing their own interests. This risk is evident among some MPs from both the Finns Party and the National Coalition Party, who plan to vote against the government’s proposed healthcare cost-saving measures, seemingly without understanding their broader implications.

One can only hope this doesn’t happen and that these MPs might even abstain from voting. However, given their prior high-profile public opposition, it seems likely they are determined to undermine the government’s efforts. In doing so, they may end up aiding the left-green opposition, which seeks the government’s downfall, potentially even by spreading falsehoods.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish, Japanese, and Dutch Adults Lead in Literacy, Numeracy, and Problem-Solving Skills
A Murder in a Well-Known Finnish Immigrant Neighborhood
Immigration Policy Should Be Based on Evidence

The European Parliament elections were a celebration for the far-left in Finland

The result of yesterday's European Parliament elections in Finland certainly surprised everyone following politics. It also surprised me, so a few words about it.

The big winner of the elections was the far-left formed by the Left Alliance and the Greens, which seemed to get the largest share of votes in all elections during Finland's independence. As much as 28.6 percent of the voters gave their vote to them.

This means that the Finnish European Parliament group will henceforth provide even more support for centralization, the migration of people from developing countries, wokeness, and efforts like Euro-taxes. At the same time, the result also means that the Finnish far-left knew how to take advantage of the low voter turnout.

This, however, was not understood by the supporters of the Finns Party. They decided to stay at home, perhaps cursing the entire European Union in their minds or protesting minor issues in the Finnish government's policy, where the party participates.

And they fulfilled my warning from a few days ago that the green-left would get one more representative in the European Parliament if people supporting other political directions did not go to the polls. Thus, the voting behavior of Finnish national conservatives was, to put it nicely, foolish.

* * *

If this kind of thinking had prevailed in all EU countries, the people from Africa and the Middle East seeking to come to Europe for welfare reasons would have thanked and set off in even larger numbers. Similarly, the preservation of raw materials for the Finnish forest industry would have become a real threat, and only imagination would have been the limit to what could be achieved on the wokeness front.

The silver lining was that the national conservatives in other countries were not as foolish as the Finns, but instead achieved an electoral victory while the entire left lost support. Of course, this victory would have been greater if Finnish voters had decided to support the Finns Party candidates instead of the far-left.

With the EPP group, including the Finnish National Coalition Party, achieving an electoral victory at the Union level, we can breathe a sigh of relief and hope to see healthier politics in the EU over the next five years than in the past term. Additionally, we hope that the most idiotic plans of the previous European Parliament will not be implemented.

* * *

In addition to EU politics, the election results will also impact Finland's domestic politics. Within the government, the National Coalition Party's victory in the European elections and the Finns Party's crushing defeat will increase the influence of the Prime Minister's National Coalition Party and decrease the influence of the Finance Minister's Finns Party. Thus, the issues important to the National Coalition Party will progress better than the wishes of the Finns Party.

This will be particularly evident in Finnish immigration and asylum policies, where the lines of the National Coalition Party and the Finns Party differ. My guess is that it will be even more challenging to bring related government program policies to the Parliament and thus into law during the current parliamentary term.

The danger, therefore, is that Finnish politics will see a repeat of the phenomenon witnessed during Juha Sipilä's (Centre Party) government from 2015 to 2019. Its immigration policy program was sensible, but ultimately it was never implemented. And to top it all off, a tremendous number of people from developing countries rushed into the country without the government taking any measures to prevent it.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Mass immigration is the greatest concern for EU youth
During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed
The EU's 7.4 billion euro aid package is intellectual dishonesty