MTV3:n puoluegallup: Perussuomalaiset laskussa

by , under All categories, Enrique

Comment: This is the first poll that shows that the populist True Finns may have reached their zenith and that their popularity is weaning.  A poll commissioned by MTV3 showed in March that only 16.2% (-0.8%) would vote for the True Finns. Kokoomus and the Center Party were near-tied at 19.9% and 19.8%, respectively. The Social Democrats came in third with 18.1%.

As mentioned in previous posts, polls should be treated as polls.  However, it is pretty significant that the True Finns, which have been the rising star of the polls, are now seeing their popularity heading south.

A lot of people are very concerned about the prospect of a large populist, anti-immigrant and anti-EU party in Finland.  The attacks by other parties, media and normal voters of  the True Finns have probably start to bite.  One of the eeriest things that the head of the True Finns, Timo Soini, likes to say is that he aims to break the stranglehold of the three largest parties over Finnish politics.

In a typical True Finns style he does not mention with what he plans to replace the three parties with.

Finns go to the polls on April 17.

____________

MTV3:n puoluegallupin mukaan kokoomuksen ja keskustan kannatus on käytännössä tasoissa. Kokoomusta kannattaa 19,9 prosenttia ja keskustaa 19,8 prosenttia suomalaisista. Kolmantena on SDP 18,1 prosentin kannatuksella ja neljäntenä perussuomalaiset, jonka kannatus on 16,2 prosenttia.

To keep on reading click here.

  1. Jaakko

    “The attacks by other parties, media and normal voters of the True Finns have probably start to bite. ”

    That is true. No other party has been a target of such demonizing and chasing that True Finns have had to suffer lately. It is good to challenge them but the behaviour of the media and the other parties has been disgraceful.

    • Enrique

      Can we agree Jaakko that the True Finns represent far-right populism? The reason why it does not sound like the Sweden Democrats, DPP of Denmark or Jobbik of Hungary is because it is a Finnish party, which have a different way of acting. But if we look at the message you will notice that it is similar to those parties I mentioned. I personally believe that the largest parties should have challenged forecefully the True Finns a long time ago. Their success is based on anti-immigration and a world view that inflates myths like we don’t need EMU and that immigrants are all bums.

      You state that the behavior of the media and the other parties has been disagraceful. What do you think when a guy like James Hirvisaari when he let’s out his wrath about Muslims? What do you think about a chap like Jussi Halla-aho who belongs to Suomen Sisu and whose only merit is bashing Somalians? I think that is far more disgraceful than a belated outcry against these type of people.

  2. Sami

    “and that immigrants are all bums.”

    Maybe I have missed something, but where do they say that? As it has been mentioned several times, True Finns are not against ALL immigration.

    Btw, offtopic: is there any place in capital area where Finns can meet new immigrants (like a meeting of some sort) and help them to migrate to Finnish culture?

  3. Jaakko

    They are populists but I wouldn’t call them far-right, they are far from guys like Jobbik. And they do not think that all immigrants are bums.

    “Politiikan on oltava tiukkaa sellaisen maahanmuuton osalta, jonka vaikutukset suomalaiselle yhteiskunnalle ovat kielteiset.

    Sen sijaan katsomme, että Suomen on oltava avoin sellaiselle maahanmuutolle, jonka vaikutukset ovat neutraalit tai myönteiset. Tämä merkitsee sitä, että maahanmuuttaja, joka sopeutuu ja pystyy elättämään itse itsensä, on tervetullut. Tavalliset maahanmuuttajat arvostavat samoja asioita kuin tavalliset suomalaisetkin: kohtuullisia veroja, hyvää koulutusjärjestelmää, yhteiskuntarauhaa ja turvallisuutta. Huono maahanmuutto nakertaa pohjaa näiltä vetovoimatekijöiltä.”
    http://www.perussuomalaiset.fi/getfile.php?file=1536

    ‘Welcome if you don’t cause problems’. Not ‘let’s create an apartheid society where barbaric immigrants serve us great Christian Finns. Also, gas the Jews and Roma, throw out the job-stealing Chinks and slavemaster Finnish Swedes and create Greater Finland’.

    “You state that the behavior of the media and the other parties has been disagraceful. What do you think when a guy like James Hirvisaari let’s out his wrath about Muslims? What do you think about a chap like Jussi Halla-aho who belongs to Suomen Sisu and whose only merit is bashing Somalians? I think that is far more disgraceful than a belated outcry against these type of people.”

    Hirvisaari and Halla-aho are individual persons, and they express their personal opinions, but the media should not take sides or be biased because it is expected to tell the truth. Halla-aho’s one merit is being a subject of a political show trial which he nearly won entirely (in the media he was labeled guilty, of course). Also, bringing this whole “hommaforum-maahanmuuttokriittisyys-nuiva-kukkahattutäti-monikultturismi-rasismi” debate into the political discussion is partly his achievement (played a big role but of course it would still have risen eventually).

  4. JusticeDemon

    It only takes a small substitution to show how utterly vacuous that manifesto statement is:

    Politiikan on oltava tiukkaa sellaisen lapsenhankinnan osalta, jonka vaikutukset suomalaiselle yhteiskunnalle ovat kielteiset.
    Sen sijaan katsomme, että Suomen on oltava avoin sellaiselle lapsenhankinnalle, jonka vaikutukset ovat neutraalit tai myönteiset. Tämä merkitsee sitä, että lapsi, joka sopeutuu ja pystyy elättämään itse itsensä, on tervetullut.

    I am 100 % in favour of not having children who grow up to become serial killers. On the other hand, I wholly support having children who grow up to become law-abiding taxpayers.

    This is all very fine and pretty until I announce that YOU, Jaakko, should not have children for the foregoing reason.

    Formulate your natural argument against this, and then do exactly the same substitution in reverse.

    Vesa Puuronen has pointed out recently that the racism in statements of the kind quoted above is hidden in the attitudes of certain readers in the form of a pre-agreement to interpret them in a certain way. In this case the readers have already agreed that they can identify “good” and “bad” immigrants based on such factors as appearance and ethnocultural background.

  5. Jaakko

    Better analogy would be:

    “Yrityksen politiikan on oltava tiukkaa sellaisen työllistämisen osalta, jonka vaikutukset yritykselle ovat kielteiset.
    Sen sijaan katsomme, että OY Yritys AB:n on oltava avoin sellaiselle palkkaukselle, jonka vaikutukset ovat neutraalit tai myönteiset. Tämä merkitsee sitä, että työntekijä, joka sopeutuu ja tekee töitä palkkansa eteen, on tervetullut.”

    You can go to the square one with hiring and firing somebody like with giving a person a residence permit and deporting him, you can’t undo a birth. A child doesn’t decide to be born but a worker decides to sign a contract and join the company. An immigrant decides to immigrate.

  6. JusticeDemon

    Jaakko

    You have taken the point.

    More generally, there is no substance to a programme statement that merely declares support for virtue and opposition to sin. “We ought to do the right thing” is not a substantive policy principle, nor is “we intend to do the right thing” a substantive manifesto commitment.

    With this vacuous verbiage submitted as the underlying philosophy of the PS position on immigration, it’s hardly surprising that the manifesto calls for empty amendments to the Aliens Act, thereby giving the impression that they don’t know what this law already says.

  7. Sami

    Why you always prefer True Finns as anti-immigrant party? They are immigration critical party, but they are not anti-immigrant party. There are a few party members who has more racist point of view to immigration, but there are many other good candidates. It seems that you are labelling all True Finns to same group and then you call other people racist when they are labelling, for example, all Somalians to same group? Shouldn’t we agree that there are some bad and good apples in both groups?

    Just an advice: you need to be critical to both sides and try to see other people side on things. Otherwise you are far-(left?) supporter and it doesn’t make you any better person than the people you disagree with.

  8. JusticeDemon

    Sami

    So you are now seeking sympathy for the devil in the name of a balanced debate? How far does this principle extend?

    Do you think any of those party members with a “more racist point of view” would be adopted as parliamentary election candidates by any other party? What kind of political group welcomes such people into membership?

  9. Sami

    Eh, aren’t you overreacting just little bit? “Sympathy for the devil”, yes it is just an expression, but sounds little bit harsh. For me True Finns are just another party amongst the others. They might have different view point that you, but I don’t think they deserve a witch-hunt.

    There are many bad candidates in other parties as well. Drug users, criminals and even mental instability (the last person I know and I really hope nobody votes for him). It doesn’t mean that people are actually going to vote for them. And like I said, not all True Finn candidates are bad; for example, there is even immigrant candidate (Freddy Van Wonterghem) and candidate who is working and helping immigrant teenagers (Mika Niikko).

    However, I do not support True Finns, but for totally different reasons than you do. I don’t actually understand why you are so worried of True Finns success. What is the worst thing they could do if they would be in three biggest parties or even more unlikely, be the biggest party? They still need other parties support.

    This election starts to reminding slightly US president election in 2008. There was bunch of idiots who though that everything will change to better if Obama wins and then bunch of idiots who though everything will change to worse. What happened? Nothing much really, except the new health care regulation. US is still in war, economy is in bad shape, people can still buy guns from stores, rich people are gettings richer and poor people poorer etc. Politician always promise that everything will change to better if you vote for them, but in reality usually they don’t do even 5% of the things they promise. The same thing with all Finnish parties, including True Finns.

    So, you can relax: nothing will most likely change in Finland either.

    • Enrique

      Sami, have you heard of the Nuiva manifest? Do you know what Suomen Sisu stands for? What about some candidates denying the Holocaust?

      The so-called witch hunt that you speak of was started by the True Finns. It was directed at immigrants, refugees and other people who do not match up to the True Finns. We know that there are two types of True FInns: former SMP and Suomen Sisu. The latter is a neo-fascist association that apparently takes seriously the readings of former Klu Klux Klan head David Duke. They seem to also like Alfred Rosenberg, a Nazi war criminal who was convicted and hanged at Nuremburg for crimes against humanity.

      In light of these things any sensible Finn would give a very straightforward thumbs down to a party that supports these types of ideas.

      Wake up and smell the coffee, Sami. Don’t be so naive.

  10. Jaakko

    Of course the True Finns’ immigration program continues with four more pages. Here’s some of of it:

    “Suomalaiset veronmaksajat rahoittavat asiointitulkkausta henkilöille, jotka ovat asuneet Suomessa vuosikausia. Tällainen loputon vastaan tuleminen ei kannusta kielen opiskeluun. Katsomme, että välttämättömissä kotouttamiseen liittyvissä toimenpiteissä valtion tulee kustantaa tulkkaukset korkeintaan ensimmäisten kolmen vuoden ajalta siitä päivästä lukien, kun oleskelulupa on myönnetty. Tämän jälkeen kustannukset, jos tulkkauksia järjestetään, maksaa aina se taho, joka tulkkausta tarvitsee.”

    “On tärkeää käsitellä turvapaikkahakemukset nopeasti ja tehokkaasti, jotta yhteiskunnan varoja säästyy eikä henkilö, jolle turvapaikka lopulta myönnetään, turhaudu byrokratian takia tai laitostu. Tavoitteeksi tulee ottaa, että turvapaikkahakemuksen käsittely kestäisi korkeintaan 90 vuorokautta, kun se vuonna 2010 kesti 321 vuorokautta pelkästään Maahanmuuttovirastossa.”

    “Nykyhallituksen ulkomaalaisten toimeentulotukeen tekemät leikkaukset ovat riittämättömiä, koska Suomen maksamat tuet ovat edelleen koko EU:n suurimpia. Vastaanottokeskuksissa asuville turvapaikanhakijoille tulisi antaa ruokatarpeet, majoitus ja välttämätön terveydenhoito sekä vaatetus.”

    “Kaikki ns. Dublin-tapaukset on palautettava siihen EU-maahan, johon he ovat ensiksi saapuneet. Päätös olisi saatava tehtyä alle kuukaudessa, kun tällä hetkellä aikaa päätöksen tekemiseen kuluu keskimäärin useita kuukausia. –”

    “Humanitaariselle maahanmuuttajalle tulee osoittaa asunto sieltä, mistä asuntoja on edullisesti saatavilla. Hän on vapaa muuttamaan uuteen osoitteeseen heti, kun hän pystyy itse vastaamaan asumismenoistaan.”

    “Perussuomalaisten mielestä vaatimus itsenäisestä toimeentulosta ja kyvystä huolehtia taloudellisesti myös Suomeen kutsuttavasta perheenjäsenestä tulee ulottaa kaikkiin maahanmuuttajiin, pois lukien ne, jotka ovat kansainvälisten sopimusten tarkoittamia pakolaisia. Tanskan mallin mukaisesti voidaan edellyttää esimerkiksi,
    Perussuomalaisten eduskuntavaaliohjelma että perheen yhdistämistä hakeva henkilö ei saa olla nauttinut toimeentulotukea viimeisten kahden vuoden aikana.”

    “Oikeus perheenyhdistämisiin on rajoitettava koskemaan vain ydinperhettä, käsittäen vain puolisot ja heidän alaikäiset biologiset lapsensa. Vanhemmuus on varmistettava dna-testein ja alaikäisyys biologisin testein.”

    “Vakavaan rikokseen tai toistuviin rikoksiin syyllistyneet maahanmuuttajat on karkotettava maasta. Osoittamalla piittaamattomuutta Suomen lakeja ja suomalaisia kohtaan maahanmuuttajan on katsottava luopuneen vapaaehtoisesti niistä oikeuksista ja eduista, jotka Suomi on hänelle tarjonnut.
    Nähdäksemme oleskelulupa on peruutettava myös, jos käy myöhemmin ilmi, että se on myönnetty valheellisten henkilöön, lähtömaahan tai olosuhteisiin liittyvien tietojen nojalla. Toisin kuin nykyään, viranomaisille valehtelun tulee johtaa seurauksiin.”

    “Kansalaisuus voitaisiin myöntää esim. viiden vuoden maassaolon jälkeen muiden ehtojen (suomen kielen taito, ei huomattavaa riippuvuutta tulonsiirroista, ei merkittävää rikoshistoriaa) täyttyessä.”

    Those are not empty suggestions but differ pretty much from the current policies.

  11. JusticeDemon

    Jaakko

    Something now makes me suspect that you aren’t quite who you claim to be, but really on a fishing expedition for ammunition to use against PS. Oh well, the outcome is the same either way:

    “… valtion tulee kustantaa tulkkaukset korkeintaan ensimmäisten kolmen vuoden ajalta siitä päivästä lukien, kun oleskelulupa on myönnetty. Tämän jälkeen kustannukset, jos tulkkauksia järjestetään, maksaa aina se taho, joka tulkkausta tarvitsee.”

    This is already public policy. The general principles governing interpretation are set out here.

    There is always some degree of tension between the costs of interpretation and the need for expeditious processing. Public authorities are required to process the cases that come before them, and are not free to neglect this duty merely because of a language barrier. It is often more cost-effective for an authority to use an interpreter than to attempt to process a case without one, so the question becomes one of expense. How much more should we be prepared to spend on public services for the luxury of doing without interpreters in these cases?

    “On tärkeää käsitellä turvapaikkahakemukset nopeasti ja tehokkaasti, jotta yhteiskunnan varoja säästyy eikä henkilö, jolle turvapaikka lopulta myönnetään, turhaudu byrokratian takia tai laitostu. Tavoitteeksi tulee ottaa, että turvapaikkahakemuksen käsittely kestäisi korkeintaan 90 vuorokautta, kun se vuonna 2010 kesti 321 vuorokautta pelkästään Maahanmuuttovirastossa.”

    Name one political party, government or Interior Minister that has not had this objective at any time in the last 20 years. This is nothing new.

    “Nykyhallituksen ulkomaalaisten toimeentulotukeen tekemät leikkaukset ovat riittämättömiä, koska Suomen maksamat tuet ovat edelleen koko EU:n suurimpia. Vastaanottokeskuksissa asuville turvapaikanhakijoille tulisi antaa ruokatarpeet, majoitus ja välttämätön terveydenhoito sekä vaatetus.”

    Aside from the implication that discrimination is acceptable in general social welfare provision (after changing the Finnish Constitution, withdrawing from at least two major international Conventions and repealing the Equality Act), this is already public policy. Benefits in various EU Member States depend on the local cost of living.

    It’s worth noting that vouchering and provisioning systems are very costly to operate and administer (think about quartermastering in the army), so again the question comes down to how much more we should be willing to spend in order to clothe the residents of reception centers.

    “Kaikki ns. Dublin-tapaukset on palautettava siihen EU-maahan, johon he ovat ensiksi saapuneet. Päätös olisi saatava tehtyä alle kuukaudessa, kun tällä hetkellä aikaa päätöksen tekemiseen kuluu keskimäärin useita kuukausia. –”

    The whole point of the Dublin Regulation is to achieve precisely this outcome, though in the case of returns to Greece there is a new legal obstacle that is again based on a major international Convention. Otherwise this is merely a statement of good intentions similar to the one about expediting the processing of asylum applications. Show us the political party that does not seek such an outcome.

    “Humanitaariselle maahanmuuttajalle tulee osoittaa asunto sieltä, mistä asuntoja on edullisesti saatavilla. Hän on vapaa muuttamaan uuteen osoitteeseen heti, kun hän pystyy itse vastaamaan asumismenoistaan.”

    Section 9 of the Finnish Constitution would be hard to change unless the same provision also applied to everyone, which would again involve institutionalising discrimination, withdrawing from international legal commitments and so on. Otherwise immigrants will tend to reside in the place where they first settle, i.e. the place where they are living when the first residence permit is issued. Domicile registration is not possible before this.

    “Perussuomalaisten mielestä vaatimus itsenäisestä toimeentulosta ja kyvystä huolehtia taloudellisesti myös Suomeen kutsuttavasta perheenjäsenestä tulee ulottaa kaikkiin maahanmuuttajiin, pois lukien ne, jotka ovat kansainvälisten sopimusten tarkoittamia pakolaisia. Tanskan mallin mukaisesti voidaan edellyttää esimerkiksi,
    Perussuomalaisten eduskuntavaaliohjelma että perheen yhdistämistä hakeva henkilö ei saa olla nauttinut toimeentulotukea viimeisten kahden vuoden aikana.”

    This will not wash as grounds for enforced separation of children from their parents. First Finland must withdraw from the Convention on the Rights of the Child. I don’t see this declared as a manifesto objective (vote for us and we shall make Finland the first country to renounce a fundamental human rights convention that has been ratified by nearly every country in the world).

    “Oikeus perheenyhdistämisiin on rajoitettava koskemaan vain ydinperhettä, käsittäen vain puolisot ja heidän alaikäiset biologiset lapsensa. Vanhemmuus on varmistettava dna-testein ja alaikäisyys biologisin testein.”

    First Finland must withdraw from the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which imposes no such restriction on the right of a child to maintain direct and immediate contact with a foster parent and foster siblings.

    “Vakavaan rikokseen tai toistuviin rikoksiin syyllistyneet maahanmuuttajat on karkotettava maasta. Osoittamalla piittaamattomuutta Suomen lakeja ja suomalaisia kohtaan maahanmuuttajan on katsottava luopuneen vapaaehtoisesti niistä oikeuksista ja eduista, jotka Suomi on hänelle tarjonnut.
    Nähdäksemme oleskelulupa on peruutettava myös, jos käy myöhemmin ilmi, että se on myönnetty valheellisten henkilöön, lähtömaahan tai olosuhteisiin liittyvien tietojen nojalla. Toisin kuin nykyään, viranomaisille valehtelun tulee johtaa seurauksiin.”

    Aside from the dumb and empty rhetoric in the second sentence, this is a restatement of current law and policy. I refer you to my observations in the thread here called YLE: True Finns Publish Election Manifesto, February 25, 2011.

    “Kansalaisuus voitaisiin myöntää esim. viiden vuoden maassaolon jälkeen muiden ehtojen (suomen kielen taito, ei huomattavaa riippuvuutta tulonsiirroista, ei merkittävää rikoshistoriaa) täyttyessä.”

    It is amusing that PS recommend reducing the basic citizenship qualifying period from the present six years to five years. Congratulations! You have found a substantive proposal.

  12. Jaakko

    “Something now makes me suspect that you aren’t quite who you claim to be, but really on a fishing expedition for ammunition to use against PS.”

    Maybe I really am an undercover Green party agent.

    But you got to admit that compared to other parties the True Finns have given a lot more information about their goals on this matter. The Green party, the Coalition party, SDP, and fellows write a lot more cottoncandydreamy stuff. Their election programs are 10 pages full of nice pictures. Every one of them wants to decrease unemployment rates and make Finland “paremminvointivaltio”, go ahead and call Katainen or Kiviniemi and tell them that those things are nothing new.

    “This is already public policy. The general principles governing interpretation are set out here.”

    No it’s not. That document or the law doesn’t say anything about people paying their own interpreter after three years of residing in Finland.

    “It is often more cost-effective for an authority to use an interpreter than to attempt to process a case without one, so the question becomes one of expense. ”

    Plan C: you need an interpreter, you are given one, the bill comes afterwards and you pay it from your own pocket.

    “Aside from the implication that discrimination is acceptable in general social welfare provision (after changing the Finnish Constitution, withdrawing from at least two major international Conventions and repealing the Equality Act), this is already public policy. Benefits in various EU Member States depend on the local cost of living.”

    Turvapaikanhakijat. Asylum seekers. Does it mean “a citizen of Finland”? Or “a person with a residence permit”?
    http://www.uusisuomi.fi/kotimaa/77561-turvapaikanhakijaperheelle-suomessa-1277-euroa-ruotsissa-531-euroa (they decreased the sum after this but it’s still second highest in Europe.

    “This will not wash as grounds for enforced separation of children from their parents. First Finland must withdraw from the Convention on the Rights of the Child. I don’t see this declared as a manifesto objective (vote for us and we shall make Finland the first country to renounce a fundamental human rights convention that has been ratified by nearly every country in the world).”

    So is it really better to take the whole wide family from cousin to granpa and from sibling to uncle in when one of them is here? There really isn’t many countries in the world that actually act like you claim they do. Besides True Finns say that refugees, real refugees, aren’t expected to make a living before connecting the family.

    “It is amusing that PS recommend reducing the basic citizenship qualifying period from the present six years to five years. Congratulations! You have found a substantive proposal.”

    Not so amusing. PS clearly respects quality over quantity and is ready to give the citizenship even after a short period of time if everything else is in order.

  13. JusticeDemon

    Jaakko

    Take another look at the regulations on providing interpreters. There is no general right to interpretation services, even for the alleged three years (this seems to be based on confusion over central government transfers to local authorities under the UNHCR resettlement programme). Provision of interpretation at public expense is based on a public interest need, and it also depends on the party that initiates the official process. The client is normally liable for the costs of interpretation in matters that the client initiates, but the authority may choose to defray the costs of interpretation if it decides that this is necessary in order to process the matter correctly and expeditiously.

    The practicalities of interpretation are well illustrated in a legendary story about “maailmankansalainen” CB Hall from the mid to late 1980s. Hall was interviewed at the police station in Kotka where he explicitly insisted that the interview be conducted in Finnish and not in English. His Finnish at the time was of little more than beginner standard (a couple of years later it was good enough to earn a living as a translator). One outcome of this process was that instead of the normal 20-30 minutes, the standard deportation interview took several hours to complete, as Hall had to translate all of his responses into Finnish using a pocket dictionary. The police officer conducting the interview (who could speak reasonable English) had to be paid for those hours on duty. This was obviously an extreme example, but it illuminates the point that I made about the balance between expedient processing and the cost of interpretation.

    Communication problems can be a significant cause of costly delay and even costlier error in public service provision, but in order to send the bill that you suggest, it would be necessary for front office public servants to conclude that the client’s Finnish/Swedish/Sami is inadequate for the process. To match the standards of reliability that are required in public service, this would in turn mean retraining public servants in front office duties to evaluate the language competence of their clients. Otherwise decisions to charge for services not requested would be legally unsafe (the equivalent of receiving a bill for mandatory automobile repairs issued without a formal vehicle inspection or a bill for sanitation costs or safety repairs without a qualified public health or factory safety inspection).

    There is also a more general problem concerning the preventive effect of prompt public service provision. If immigrants are supposed to pay for interpretation services when seeking medical attention, for example, then this will serve as a disincentive to doing so. The result is that medical intervention comes later at far higher cost (e.g. tender cavity vs. abscessed tooth) or there may be other, more widespread undesirable consequences (e.g. spread of contagious diseases). There is a comparable public interest element in almost every kind of public service provision.

    In the case of procedures initiated by the authority there is generally a public interest in ensuring that the client provides reliable information. For example, it is unlikely that witnesses will come forward if they are expected to pay for performing their public duty.

    That Uusi Suomi story is about as useful as comparing the prices of fresh fish in various countries without considering how close they are to the sea. A full comparison of subsidence costs would have to include everything, including economies of scale. Gasp shock horror: mämmi is three times more expensive in London than in Helsinki at Easter. Baked beans are twice the price in Finland compared to the UK. It is not surprising that asylum seeker reception is cheaper in Sweden: they have ten times more asylum seekers.

    The only important factor in family reunification is that the family member in Finland cannot return to live with the family members abroad. Finland does not return people to war zones. This has nothing to do with the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention, so your reference to “real refugees” is irrelevant. If the family cannot be reunited in a war zone, then reunification in Finland is the only way to bring children together with their parents and siblings.

    I offer you the same challenge as I set out at the end of February. Show me how the PS manifesto would require any change to the Aliens Act.

    • Enrique

      Hi Niko and welcome to Migrant Tales. We are happy that you could join us. Nobody knows but if the TF get less than 20 it will be a defeat for Soini. What do you think?

  14. Pertti Virtanen

    Latest estimate was 36 seats. Enrique, when I stumbled across this blog I had not quite realized that you live in Finland. As you do, you should know better. I have now come to the conclusion that you and JusticeDemon are fanatics who are out to bash True Finns. Facts seem to mean very little to you nor portraying people as something they are not. Comparing True Finns with KKK is just offensive. Apparently truth or logical arguments are not that important in your message.

    I am against internet hate writings and promoting them, thus will not contribute to this extremist and offensive blog anymore.

    • Enrique

      –Comparing True Finns with KKK is just offensive.

      Are we saying that? I am stating that some parts of the True Finns led by Jussi Halla-aho belong to a far-right association called Suomen Sisu. Teemu Lahtinen and James Hirvisaari should help you see what I mean. These are far-right candidates of the True Finns that seem to forget that World War 2 ended. A HS story stated that Suomen Sisus has on its book shelf the writings of Alfred Rosenberg and former Klu Klux Klan head David Duke. Creepy stuff if you ask me.

    • Enrique

      Here is a depressing video from Israel that could apply to any city in Europe and elsewhere.

  15. Niko

    I guess it will be something between 29-35 seats, but we will see in Sunday. I have never followed elections previous years, but this year it is much more interesting. National Coalition Party will most likely lose many seats, but will stay as the biggest party. My guess what will happen after the election:

    – Bailout for Portugal will happen
    – Mandatory Swedish stays as mandatory
    – Immigration laws might get slightly more strict, but not as strict as True Finns have planned
    – Sentences for rape / child abuse will be tightened slightly
    – More taxes
    – More cuts
    – Unemployment increases

    Let’s see after a year how my guess went 🙂

  16. JusticeDemon

    Pertti Virtanen

    Lol

    We hadn’t even begun the process of seeing you off. Coming on here with all of the usual xenophobic nonsense supported by urban myths that have no substance. Judging by the way you resign in a huff, my guess is that you are one and the same person all the time: JL, Jaakko etc.

  17. Jaakko

    Justicedemon

    are you getting a bit paranoid? You can see that Pertti’s English is way better than mine, and I’m sure you can ask Enrique if all the posts you disagree with really are coming from the same address.

Leave a Reply