Tag: Finnish immigration policy

Verkkouutiset: Hyvä persut! Muistakaa äänestää kehitysavun puolesta!

Posted on by Migrant Tales

COMMENT: This story that appeared on the Kokoomus’ web publication Verkkouutiset has an interesting interview with Green Party MP Pekka Haavisto that reveals how the True Finns would change refugee policy. He mentions that True Finn MP Pietari Jääskäläinen believes that the best solution for Finland would be to stop accepting refugees. Our country should, instead, help these needy people near their home countries.

The True Finns are also seeking to tighten immigration policy and are critical of Finland’s membership in the European Union.

Should such a party be taken seriously? What do you think?

———–

Kirjoittanut SUVI HAUTANEN

Kansanedustaja Pekka Haavisto (vihr.) ei laita juurikaan painoarvoa perussuomalaisten puheille turvapaikanhakijoiden auttamisesta lähellä kotimaata.

Kansanedustaja Pietari Jääskäläinen (ps.) esitteli tiistaina perussuomalaisten “patenttiratkaisun” pakolaisten kotouttamisongelmiin.

Green Party MP Pekka Haavisto. (Lehtikuva/Jarno Mela)

Puolueen mielestä Suomen ei tulisi vastaanottaa lainkaan turvapaikanhakijoita, vaan turvapaikkaa tarvitsevat tulisi kotouttaa lähellä kotimaataan.

– Aina kun sanotaan, että ihmisiä autetaan lähellä, niin odotan, että hyvä, muistakaa sitten äänestää korkeamman kehitysyhteistyömäärärahan puolesta eduskunnassa, sanoo Pekka Haavisto Verkkouutisille.

– Minä en ole huomannut, että perussuomalaiset olisivat äänestäneet vielä kertaakaan korkeampien kehitysyhteistyömäärärahojen puolesta tai tehneet siitä aloitetta. Puhutaan, että autetaan siellä kotona, mutta siihen ei osoiteta varoja. Minä en tällaiselle puheille pane paljon arvoa, jos ei siinä ole jotain esitystä.

Suomi on varannut kehitysyhteistyöhön 965,6 miljoonaa euroa tälle vuodelle.

Jos esimerkiksi pakolaisten ja turvapaikanhakijoiden vastaanottoon tälle vuodelle budjetoitu 102,4 miljoonaa euroa käytettäisiin pakolaisten kotouttamiseen lähellä heidän kotimaataan, tarkoittaisi se kymmenen prosentin korotusta kehitysyhteistyömäärärahoihin.

EU:n systeemi poskellaan

Haaviston mielestä turvapaikanhakijoiden kohtelun pitäisi olla samanlaista kaikkialla Euroopan unionissa.

Hänen mielestä nykyjärjestelmä ei toimi. Sen jälkeen, kun ihminen on päässyt Schengen-alueelle, hän voi päättää, mistä maasta hakee turvapaikkaa.

– Pohjoismaat on ollut yksi suosittu kohde, eli mennään sellaiseen maahan, jossa tiedetään, että saadaan oikeudenmukainen kohtelu. Tässä on mielestäni EU:n systeemi poskellaan.

Hänen mielestä EU-mailla tulisi olla yhtenäiset standardit, minkä verran rahaa turvapaikanhakijoille maksetaan ja minkä verran materiaalista tukea hakemuksen käsittelyaikana annetaan.

– Minun mielestäni painetta pitäisi olla EU:n suuntaan, että nämä systeemit olisivat yhtenevät.

Vähintään tuhat kiintiöpakolaista

Perussuomalaisten mielestä Suomen tulisi vastaanottaa ainoastaan kiintiöpakolaisia. Haavisto huomauttaa, että se olisi kansainvälisten sopimusten vastaista.

– Kyllähän niiden (turvapaikanhakijoiden) joukossa on aitoa apua tarvitsevia ihmisiä, jotka täyttävät kaikki YK:n pakolaiskriteerit.

Haaviston mielestä kiintiöpakolaisia pitäisi ottaa vähintään tuhat vuosittain nykyisen 750 sijaan.

– Se on aika matala se kiintiö, minkä verran kiintiöpakolaisia otetaan. Minulla on aina ollut hirveän suuri sympatia tätä YK-systeemiä kohtaan. He ovat helisemässä pitkään jatkuneissa kriiseissä, joissa ihmiset ovat leireillä vuosia tai vuosikymmeniä. Jotta UNHCR:n (YK:n pakolaisavun) toiminta voisi jatkua, niin siellä pitää olla joku reikä ulos ratkaisemattomista kriiseistä. Sen vuoksi itse toivoisin, että me voisimme tässä auttaa YK:ta enemmänkin.

Hän ottaa esimerkiksi burmalaiset Thaimaan pakolaisleirillä.

– Thaimaa ei päästä heitä ulos leiriltä, että he voisivat toimia Thaimaassa vapaasti ja Burmaan heillä ei ole paluuta. Minua on tällaisten ihmisten kohtalo surettanut. Ihmisten elämä hukkaantuu paikoissa, missä heillä ei ole paluuta entiseen, mutta mitään uutta ei ole tarjolla.

Tietotaitoa takaisin Somaliaan

Haavisto kertoo ehdottaneensa ulkomaankauppa- ja kehitysyhteistyöministeri Paavo Väyryselle (kesk.), että Suomi voisi tukea tietotaidon viemistä Somaliaan.

– Olen itse käynyt katsomassa Hargeysassa, kuinka Suomesta takaisin muuttaneet somalit ovat panneet pystyyn yliopiston ja ovat mukana liiketoiminnassa siellä.

Haavisto näkee, että Suomen somaliväestön tietotaidon ja osaamisen voisi yhdistää kehitysyhteistyön tavoitteeseen vakauttaa Somalia ja luoda sinne työpaikkoja. Hänen mielestä sitä varten tarvittaisiin kehitysohjelma.

– Sieltä on lähtenyt koulutetut, osaavat intellektuellit sodan jaloista pois. Nyt kun jotkut alueet ovat rauhallisia, näitä ihmisiä tarvittaisiin kipeästi auttamaan jälleenrakennuksessa.

Haavisto korostaa, että kyse ei olisi pakotetusta paluumuutosta, vaan mahdollisuudesta. Väyrynen ei Haaviston mielestä ole ainakaan vielä lämmennyt idealle.

The sad case of Somalis in Finland

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Below is a good example of how a public official’s comments helps  strengthen racism and stereotypes of certain ethnic groups living in Finland. One of the biggest flaws in the arguments of anti-immigrant groups is that they incorrectly believe that cultures don’t change and therefore different groups are incompatible. I hope that the same stance as these far-right groups hasn’t overtaken the Finnish Immigration Service when we speak of the Somalis.

Does the Finnsh Immigration Service have a special grudge against the Somalians? Is this the reason why it likes to feed these types of stories in order to fuel xenophobia to new heights?

The warning is, however, clear: We don’t want Somalis in Finland because they will never adapt to our country. Up to 90% who want to move to Finland through family reunification are illiterate.

Phony bolony!

UPDATE (31.3.10): Here is a good example (in Finnish) of the hysteria that the Finnish Immigration Service and the media fuel with a percentage. The headline of the Tampere-based Aamulehti article says it all: Finland is not prepared for an avalanche of illiterate immigrants (Suomi ei ole valmistautunut lukutaidottomien maahanmuuttajien vyöryyn). The term “avalanche” is not only misleading it gives the impression that Finland is being invaded by “thousands of illiterate immigrants.”

It is odd that some Finnish policy-makers and politicians never ask if the problem of high unemployment among Somalians has to do with the hostility and bigotry they face daily in our society. Is it due to their outdated views of cultures and outright prejudice?

Finnish anti-immigrant and anti-Somalian critics forget to tell us that the majority of Italian, Spanish, Eastern European and other immigrants that moved to the Americas in the late-eighteenth and early nineteenth century were illiterate. Even though they faced racism and discrimination in their new countries, some of these groups ended up adapting very well and succeeding.

Even blacks from Africa that were forced to come to the United States as slaves from 1619 suffered tremendously from an oppressive system but later, through centuries of struggle, ended up finding a prominant place in US society. Most of these blacks, as well as their future relatives, were once illiterate.

Jussi Halla-aho, who appears to take joy and pride in bashing Somalis and Muslims for fun and personal gain, quoted Jorma Vuorio of the Finnish Immigration Service by stating that “90% of Somalis coming to Finland are illiterate.”

According to the Finnish Immigration Service, Vuorio mentioned that “85%-90%” of Somalians seeking residence permits in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, are illiterate. Fine. But how many? According to the Finnish Immigration Service, we are speaking of 2,260 residence-permit applicants in 2009 compared with 1,855 in the previous year. “We expect the figure to rise to 4,000 this year,” said a Finnish Immigration Service official.

Seriously, can a few thousand Somalis force our social system to implode and did all of the applicants receive a permit to come to Finland? Are they a walking social time bomb as Hallo-aho warns in his usual populist style?

The social bomb that some warn us of will be instigated by our suspicion and prejudices – not by a handful of Somalians who can learn to read and write with our help.

EDITORIAL: Has racism inflicted Finland?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Taking into account the underwhelming size of the immigrant and refugee community, what have we done wrong and why are we the target of daily insults, racism and abuse by opportunistic politicians and their parties? Even the Social Democrats, the party that has championed for the rights of the working man, appears to have aligned itself close to the True Finns on immigration.

I recently asked in a Kokoomus blog two questions: Is Finland a multicultural society and if Kokoomus had an official immigration policy? I never got a response for the first question. For the second one, Kokoomus gave me a link to a report published in November. When I asked them the second question again, if the party had an official immigration policy, I got no response.

The truth is that no political party in Finland has an official policy on immigration. Without such an official stance, it leaves the political playing field inside a party to a wide range of contradicting views: from xenophobic to pro-immigration.

In this sense, the immigration policy, “in Rome do as the Romans do,” suggested by Social Democratic Party chairwoman Jutta Urpilainen, is novel since the SDP will become the first party in Finland with an official immigration policy.  Whether the party’s stance on immigration is the right one or if it will be successful is another question, however. Many countries have suggested this nationalistic approach by forcing immigrants to sign contracts that they will follow the laws of their new homeland.

SDP’s immigration policy will fail not only because it is ethnocentric, but because it is unconstitutional. How can you force people to comply to a narrow view of Finnishness (whatever that is) if the Constitution and Non-Discrimination Act permit diversity and other matters such as freedom of worship?

The one-sided ongoing immigration debate has turned into a farce and an insult to all immigrants and refugees living in Finland.

It would not be a bad idea if immigrants went on strike like thousands did in Italy and France to drive home the point that we are not anyone’s pet political fodder.

Xenophobic death threats to the Finnish government

Posted on by Migrant Tales

The most recent death threats to some members of Finland’s government as well as immigrants reported by Nelonen television by a group of  fanatics is in some cases the doing of the politicians, who have not spoken out strongly enough against racism but have by and large preferred to remain silent on the matter.

Their timidness to such a threat has only emboldened fanatics.

UPDATE March 2: A good example of such hesitancy was pointed out by Jonas, who regularly visits our blog: Vanhanen, speaking to the Swedish news division of Yle, did condemn the death threat to Thors – but only worryingly several days later and then only after Stefan Wallin demanded it. And, as far as I am aware, I am yet to hear him do the same thing in the Finnish-language mass media, which is yet more concerning.

The death threats can be accessed at the following website. In the blog, the anonymous Finn gives a short bio of himself/herself after threatening to murder four members of government, President Tarja Halonen and encourage others to kill immigrants: I am a normal (?!) working family man/woman. I don´t hate foreigners and I am apolitical. I understand, however, that we are at a crossroads with respect to our country. (Olen tavallinen työssäkäyvä perheellinen. En vihaa ulkomaalaisia enkä omaa mitään poliitista suuntausta. Ymmärrän kuitenkin, että olemme tärkeässä ratkaisupisteessä maamme kannalta.)

Minister of migration and European affairs, Astrid Thors, who has been the center of a number of death threats by anti-immigrant extremists,  has been one of their prime targets.

What is most surprising about this recent incident is that it happened in a country that prizes itself for being a Nordic welfare state and whose educational system has received  global recognition in the Pisa study. The Pisa study does not evaluate the knowledge of 15 year olds in humanities but in math, reading and science.

Where have we gone wrong?

Throughout my years in Finland I have heard various politicians tell me in silence that they do not consider it wise to stand up too vociferously in favor of immigrants because of the strong anti-foreign sentiment.

I remember writing a feature on refugees in Mikkeli in eastern Finland in the early 1990s for a large-circulation weekly. I received as a result three death threats.  It was a good matter that my then-six-year-old daughter did not answer the phone.

Even though the police are investigating this recent incident, it is clear that these types of groups are a problem in Finland. Not acknowledging them or hiding our heads in the sand will only fuel the problem. How many more alarm bells do we need to hear?

The way that a democratic society deals with groups that take the law in their hands is with the full weight of the law and by speaking out against the problem.

Finland cannot afford anything less.

Immigration to Finland and the cold war

Posted on by Migrant Tales

While history provides a good answer why Finland as a nation has shown a clear manifest unease of foreigners and outside investment, it still does not provide us with an all-encompassing answer as to why. Are we still resentful of newcomers because our language rights were granted in 1862?  Is it due to the Russification period, when the Russian Empire attempted to impose their language and culture on us at the cost of our precious autonomy?

If so, we Finns hold grudges for a very long time.

Irrespective of those two historical factors, I believe the biggest culprit of our present-day negative stance gained strength during World War 2 and the cold war years. Even though we rebuilt our nation from the ashes of war, we had the right to be resentful of the Soviet Union but were censored harshly by the Finnish political intelligentsia to air our views.

The fear of the USSR, which strengthened our negative view in general of all outsiders, was reinforced by our “successful” relations with Moscow. The history of Finland in the cold war era is in a nutshell a story about how a nation broke out little by little of its political and economic near-isolation from Western Europe that culminates in 1995, when we became EU members.

Our special relationship with Moscow gave birth to Finlandization. Even though the relationship was good for Finnish-Soviet trade (we bartered manufactured goods that we could not sell elsewhere for oil), it was devastating for democracy, freedom of the press, internationalization, immigration to this country and to our identity as a nation.

During those near-stagnant cultural and political years, immigrants were called “aliens” (muukalainen) and refugees “loikkari” (a person who skips a country).

If I were a politician living at that time and wanted to impose my rule on the country, I would have certainly used the Moscow card like Center Party icon Urho Kekkonen did on many occasions.

While some Finns believe that enough historical psychoanalysis has been carried out on those bygone years, nothing could be further from the truth. There are still many skeletons in closets that will haunt and surprise us in the future. One way of keeping those revelations from appearing is by keeping them to a minimum with respect to our former relations with the USSR and the cold war period.

By keeping guarding the secrets of the past we end up doing great harm to ourselves and future generations because we continue to wrongly believe that the way things were done politically, democratically and economically (monopolies and oligopolies) were right.  A good example of what I am saying is the Center Party: they appear to be for the EU but in reality they continue support it opportunistically and reject it at every turn, like Paavo Väyrynen as a political phenomenon.

Don’t expect anything to change in Finland too rapidly. Even so, part of the answer lies in how courageously we open up the cold war years in order to understand who we are today.

Multiculturalism in Canada and Australia

Posted on by Migrant Tales

In order to clear up matters a little, I would like to show how multiculturalism as a social policy is defined in Canada and Australia. Contrary to Finland, both counties have been strongly influenced by immigration.

ADDITION (March 1, 2010): If there were a list of countries with liberal and conservative policies on immigration, Finland would end up at the bottom-end of the latter group. It has not only been in immigration policy (or the lack of it/Finland got its first immigration act in 1983!) but in its view of foreign investment (see Restricting Act of 1939, which was in force until 1992!).

What is incredible to note, and taking into account the ever-higher number of pensioners and thus a threat to our economic wellbeing, NO political party in Finland has an official immigration policy.  This is, in my opinion, incredible taking into account the demographic threats that will either make or break us economically this decade.

Even though Finland is not officially a multicultural nation, its constitution and laws encourage the same values but not as passionately.   In the Finnish Constitution and Equality Act there are, for example, no mention of the term “multicultural society.”

Moreover, in these countries I am certain that people do not go around describing their societies as multicultural every chance they get. However, it is kind of interesting that we in Finland, which has a very small foreign population, use this term liberally.


Multiculturalism in Canada

The concept of Canada as a “multicultural society” can be interpreted in different ways: descriptively (as a sociological fact), prescriptively (as ideology), from a political perspective (as policy), or as a set of intergroup dynamics (as process).

As fact, “multiculturalism” in Canada refers to the presence and persistence of diverse racial and ethnic minorities who define themselves as different and who wish to remain so. Ideologically, multiculturalism consists of a relatively coherent set of ideas and ideals pertaining to the celebration of Canada’s cultural diversity. Multiculturalism at the policy level is structured around the management of diversity through formal initiatives in the federal, provincial and municipal domains. Finally, multiculturalism is the process by which racial and ethnic minorities compete to obtain support from central authorities for the achievement of certain goals and aspirations.

This study focuses on an analysis of Canadian multiculturalism both as a demographic reality and as a public policy.

Multiculturalism in Australia

‘Multicultural’ is a term that describes the cultural and linguistic diversity of Australian society. Cultural and linguistic diversity was a feature of life for the first Australians, well before European settlement. It remains a feature of modern Australian life, and it continues to give us distinct social, cultural and business advantages.

The Australian Government’s multicultural policy addresses the consequences of this diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole. It recognises, accepts, respects and celebrates our cultural diversity.

The freedom of all Australians to express and share their cultural values is dependent on their abiding by mutual civic obligations. All Australians are expected to have an overriding loyalty to Australia and its people, and to respect the basic structures and principles underwriting our democratic society. These are: the Constitution, parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech and religion, English as the national language, the rule of law, acceptance and equality.

What Finland’s immigration policy lacks

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

If we look at the dismal amount of immigrants and refugees as well as high unemployment one can reach only one conclusion: a policy that has failed miserably. Certainly progress has been made: the number of immigrants has risen albeit slowly to  143,256 today from 12,670 in 1981, while unemployment has come down officially from 53% in 1994 to over 20%.

One of the biggest failures of our immigration policy is that it is really not an immigration policy at all but looks like a poorly assembled hall where newcomers are given a bit of schooling in the Finnish langauge and culture and then required to face the brave new world by getting a job.

The crux of the matter is that we are going to have to do a much better job if we want labor immigrants to fill jobs left by our ever-growing number of pensioners. One of the first steps in this direction is to offer more than a wham-bang-thank-you-mam approach to immigration.

Immigration is a powerful social force that can work to a society’s favor if it is done correctly. The basic starting point for a successful immigration policy is in the hands of the host society. If there is rejection, ignorance, bigotry and lack of opportunities such a policy will fail as it has today.

Another important aspect of a successful immigration policy is that it must have something more than the wham-bang in order to succeed. Those same values that unite Finns and make them proud of their society should rub off on immigrants.

What are these values? They are those in our laws and our compassion and suffering that we faced as a nation. It is in solidarity and opportunity – a real sense of community where we live together for the common good. The pathway to incorporation into Finnish society should be much faster than today.

Even though these types of values may sound as if they were from some imaginary place, it is the only way towards a successful immigration policy and sheds light why our integration policy has failed despite its good intentions. Offering no dreams and hopes to newcomers and marginalizing them is sowing the seeds of pesent and future discord.

What kind of a society are we offering newcomers if we jealously guard our dreams to ourselves?

A futuristic solution to the integration of foreigners in Finland

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Owing to the recalcitrant attitude of some readers of this blog that foreigners are a threat to Finland and that they should throw away their culture and embrace Finnish ways and life, for them I would like to propose a futuristic model of integration.

Finnish technology firms should start thinking about investing time in building the “language-and-culture chip” that can be implanted in a person’s brain and resolve all those sticky cultural and language issues.

With the help of this  chip, which he can switch on and off at will, can be purchased for an extra cost to fit your specific regional language needs (Helsinki, Turku slang or Rauma dialect) wherever and whenever you want. You do not need to take those boring language courses because the chip will help you speak Finnish in a jiffy.

But perfectly fluent Finnish in regional variations is not enough without the culture adapter.It works like any electric adapter at an extra-extra price, giving you cultural spice and meaning to your Finnish language. You will know exactly when to laugh, cry, smile or simply shut up with the help of the adapter.

Who said that learning and acting Finnish is difficult! With the language-and-culture chip Finland will be able to eat and have its cake when it comes to foreigners!