Finland to Cut Off Taxpayer Money for Immigration

Under the leadership of Finland’s Minister of Finance, Riikka Purra (Finns Party), a budget proposal has been drawn up which would allocate no state-collected tax money next year to the integration of immigrants or the reception of quota refugees. This would be a major change from the current situation, in which a significant share of tax revenue is used precisely for these purposes.

According to Minister Purra, “The integration structures within the public sector, and the ‘private’ integration industry that has grown around them, form one branch of the welfare state that has become enormous. The taxpayer foots the bill. If immigration broadly worked, such structures wouldn’t be needed at all. The government has previously cut integration spending, and in my opinion, it could easily cut more.”

Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) commented on the proposed change, stating that “Integration should not be measured by the amount of money spent, and society should have an incentive to push those granted permission straight into work. That would also put an end to all sorts of busywork back home, such as collecting droppings in matchboxes.”

It remains to be seen, however, how the other government parties and Parliament will respond to the Finance Minister’s proposal. It is expected that the ending of support for companies making their living from immigration would face opposition within the government, at least from the Swedish People’s Party, and in Parliament from the entire green-left bloc.

The taxpayer, on the other hand, would welcome it—since once Finland’s chronically deficit-ridden state budget is brought into balance, they might one day have a say over the use of a larger share of their own paycheck.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations
Finnish Branch of Extinction Rebellion Faces Possible Ban
Finland's Stance on NATO Defense Spending Is Linked to the Geopolitical Threat from Russia

Non-Discrimination Ombudsman Attempted to Prohibit the Use of Statistics in Quota Refugee Selection

Finland's Non-Discrimination Ombudsman issued a statement on Thursday, stating that discriminatory guidelines were given in the preparation of the refugee quota led by Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party). According to the Ombudsman, the political leadership has sought to favor Christian refugees at the expense of those coming from Muslim-majority countries.

Additionally, the Ombudsman’s statement mentioned the objectives of the Finns Party and used the words "open Islamophobia." She argued that the actions of the minister and her special advisor appear consistent with those objectives.

* * *

Official guidelines for Finnish civil servants explicitly state that "since a civil servant exercises public authority in their work, they must strictly follow the law and act impartially, independently, and fairly." Furthermore, they state—again verbatim—that "a civil servant must not abuse their power."

Thus, Minister of Finance and Finns Party leader Riikka Purra did not simply shrug off the statement from the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman, which is a state authority. Instead, she acknowledged that the statement was a serious matter, as "discrimination is a criminal offense." As a result, the Minister of the Interior and her ministry will examine the statement, and the Chancellor of Justice is also expected to provide an opinion on the matter.

However, according to Purra, the decision-making process regarding the refugee quota was conducted normally. She also found it "procedurally quite unusual that the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman is reading political party programs and drawing conclusions for its official processes based on them."

Additionally, she pointed out that "just a few days ago, the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman also commented more broadly on the effects of the government's immigration policy changes, so this is not the first time."

* * *

Many other Finns Party members also weighed in on the matter. Jani Mäkelä, the leader of the party’s parliamentary group, stated that "particularly the term Islamophobia and the fact that the Ombudsman openly attacks the Finns Party as a party in the statement and analyzes our policies—this, in my opinion, is not part of the Ombudsman’s duties at all."

Party secretary Harri Vuorenpää, in turn, remarked that it is "shocking that an authority whose role is specifically to ensure equality is attacking a single political party in such an openly hostile and generalized manner. We find this to be highly inappropriate and something that only deepens divisions in society."

He also questioned why those who speak about issues related to Islam are now being labeled as Islamophobes. He continued by saying that "such methods of silencing opinions are common on social media, but surely an authority responsible for equality should restrain itself... One has to wonder why the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman interprets the Finns Party’s policies so negatively. Is the Ombudsman suffering from Finns Party-phobia?"

* * *

The political left and the Greens naturally held a completely opposite view and demanded a statement from Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party). It remains to be seen what will follow—if anything at all. However, at this stage, the only certainty is that the final decision on the legality of the government's refugee quota policies will be made by the Chancellor of Justice.

As for my own stance, I firmly support selecting quota refugees in a way that ensures those coming to Finland have the best possible conditions for integrating into Western society. Accordingly, I support the government’s policy of considering Christianity as a positive criterion when selecting refugees to be admitted to Finland. 

However, my reasoning is not based—illegally—on religion itself but rather on observed differences over the years in crime statistics and employment rates between different immigrant groups in Finnish society. Ignoring these differences would simply be stupid.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish, Japanese, and Dutch Adults Lead in Literacy, Numeracy, and Problem-Solving Skills
Important Changes Ahead: What You Need to Know About Finland’s Quota Refugee Selection
The Non-Discrimination Ombudsman violates the law on openness

Finnish, Japanese, and Dutch Adults Lead in Literacy, Numeracy, and Problem-Solving Skills

The OECD has published a new Survey of Adult Skills, examining proficiency in literacy, numeracy, and adaptive problem-solving across different countries. According to the report, Finnish, Japanese, and Dutch adults outperformed their peers in other nations.

At the top of the rankings were Finns, who excelled in all three categories. However, in adaptive problem-solving, they shared the leading position with the Japanese.

On average, across OECD countries, 18% of adults lack even the most basic level of proficiency in any of the measured domains. In contrast, only 7% of Japanese adults fell into this category.

Interestingly, first-generation immigrants in Finland performed significantly worse than ethnic Finns, with the largest gap in reading proficiency among all the countries surveyed.

This finding may have implications for immigration policy, particularly in decisions regarding work-based immigrants or quota refugees. Unfortunately, the OECD report did not provide details about the immigrants’ countries of origin.

Nevertheless, this data should be obtained to inform policymakers, as questions surrounding immigration policy are highly relevant at present. Some green-left opposition politicians advocate for accepting immigrants from all countries without consideration of ethnic or religious backgrounds. Recently, they urged the government to reject measures that assess immigrants' potential performance in Finnish working life and society.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Immigration Policy Should Be Based on Evidence
10% of Foreign Students in Finland Failed to Meet Residence Requirements
Humanitarian immigration does not provide a solution to Finland's demographic dependency ratio

Important Changes Ahead: What You Need to Know About Finland’s Quota Refugee Selection

Yesterday, I blogged about how Finland plans to enhance the use of its development aid funds. Additionally, two weeks ago, I wrote that even in the long term, Finns do not benefit from humanitarian immigration from developing countries.

Today, Finland's largest newspaper reported that the second main party in Finland's government, the Finns Party, plans to reduce the proportion of Muslims among the quota refugees. This would mean, for example, that Venezuelans would be prioritized over Afghans when selecting newcomers.

In practice, Finland will take 500 quota refugees next year. This happens in such a way that the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) presents a group of individuals, from which Finnish authorities ultimately select the quota refugees for Finland, based on the government's defined regional allocation.

The decision-making process in Finland proceeds as follows: under the leadership of the responsible minister from the Finns Party, a draft proposal is prepared and will be discussed by the government's Ministerial Committee on Internal Security and Justice at the end of October. Finally, the parliament will decide on the refugee quota based on the government's proposal toward the very end of the year.

One can hope that the Finns Party's proposal goes through, and that fewer individuals with a poor assimilation outlook will arrive in Finland this year. As a result, the societal burden related to quota refugees will hopefully decrease – or even turn into a positive outcome. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Responsible Development Aid and New Priorities: Finland's Development Cooperation Reforms
The attractiveness of Finland to welfare-seeking economic migrants reduces
Humanitarian immigration does not provide a solution to Finland's demographic dependency ratio