World Politics Review: What were the key issues motivating Finnish voters in April’s election? How did the Social Democrats manage to come out on top?

Teivo Teivainen: Finland’s previous government, led by the traditionally agrarian-based Center Party, had been in power since 2014. It was exceptionally right-leaning by Finnish standards, and had made several controversial welfare cuts. Many analysts believed the Social Democrats were poised to do well in the most recent election. The political debate before the election was often about why their support as the main opposition party was not higher.

The Social Democrats got a boost in the lead-up to the election from a number of scandals around elderly care. The Center Party-led government was perceived to be deeply committed to the privatization of social services, including a larger role for private companies in the provision of elderly care. So when reports emerged in the media of low standards in privatized elderly care homes, some of which were run by companies whose public image had already been tainted by allegations of tax avoidance, the Social Democrats took a more solid lead. The image of greedy private care providers who allowed elderly people to live in squalid conditions due to cuts in personnel costs clearly did not sit well with Finland’s rapidly aging electorate.

In reality, it was the Center Party’s main coalition partner, the center-right National Coalition Party, or NCP, that was most associated with the welfare privatization process. However, that did not stop the Center Party from suffering heavy losses in the election. The Green Party had a historically strong result, going from 15 to 20 seats in Parliament. The Left Alliance also had its first electoral advance after a couple of decades of moderate but constant decline in electoral support. All in all, the political winds blew leftward, but that also helped the Finns Party to appear as a more credible alternative for voters harboring anti-left sentiments.

WPR: What accounts for the strong showing of the Finns Party, and what impact is it likely to have on the country’s political landscape?

Teivainen: The Finns Party’s rhetoric stokes fear of Islam and non-white immigration, and some of its most visible politicians have been convicted of crimes related to racist hate speech. In this year’s election, it came very close to the Social Democrats in votes and parliamentary seats. It was able to win support from traditional right-wing voters, people who previously voted for leftist parties, and people who are disillusioned with politics.

One reason for the strong showing of the Finns Party is the unusual charisma of its leader, Jussi Halla-aho. Called “the master” by some of his most dedicated supporters, Halla-aho has been able to create an image of a highly educated and skilled political operator. Before he was elected leader in 2017, the Finns Party had tried to balance between its agrarian populist roots and its growing far-right faction, and the party’s economic policy positions were sometimes characterized as having elements of social democracy. After Halla-aho took over, the anti-immigrant rhetoric took center stage, and it moved closer to traditional right-wing economic policy positions. That strategy clearly paid off at the ballot box.

Somewhat paradoxically, the growing concerns about climate change may also have boosted the Finns Party. Whereas most of the other parties at least paid lip-service to tackling climate change with tighter environmental regulations or other means, the Finns Party appealed to voters for whom climate issues do not resonate. It is a minority segment, but the issue may have provided additional reasons for some to vote for the party.

WPR: What is the outlook for the new government’s policy agenda?

Teivainen: The leader of the Social Democrats, Antti Rinne, announced soon after the election that he favored a coalition that included the Center Party, Greens, Left Alliance and, as the smallest coalition member, the Swedish People’s Party, a center-right party that tends to be quite flexible on most policy issues as long as the constitutional rights of Finland’s Swedish-speaking minority are protected. This meant that the government-opposition divide would fit neatly in the left-right seating order of the parliament, as all those sitting on the right side would remain in the opposition.

Compared to previous negotiations over government programs, there was less focus this year on detailed budget cuts and financial constraints. The new government’s program reflects an attempt to strengthen public services, somewhat in the style of classical social democratic governments. The new opposition and various commentators, especially from business-oriented groups, have criticized the new program for being an unrealistic wish list. At the same time, the wish list comes with conditions. Many of the tentative budget increases for social services like education will to some extent depend on increasing revenue by growing the economy and boosting the employment rate.

In some senses, like the focus on public spending, the overall transformation from an exceptionally right-leaning to an exceptionally left-leaning government seems clear. For the time being, the coalition seems solid and ideologically aligned, although splits could emerge in the future over public spending. A member of the Center Party is in charge of the powerful Finance Ministry, and at some point, the party may demand spending constraints that other coalition parties find hard to accept. Moreover, some of the changes can be considered more symbolic than deep. The new government’s program was announced not in the traditional government building, but in a public library where the party leaders arrived using public transportation. The message was clear: The new government intends to defend the public sphere, unlike its privatization-oriented predecessor. There was also a notable change in gender composition. In the previous government, only five out of 16 ministers were women. In the new one, there is a female majority—11 out of 19.

On foreign policy, major transformations are unlikely. The “NATO option” is still one of the symbolic cornerstones of security policy, meaning the government continues to leave open the possibility of seeking entry to NATO, but is unlikely to do so. International development cooperation is likely to get some new resources, and the government may open new embassies in Africa, East Asia and Southeast Asia. According to one of my sources, some foreign missions could see a new emphasis on attracting skilled labor to Finland. There is a relatively widely perceived need for labor, especially in the health and elderly care sectors, as the population is aging. Finally, one of the immediate tasks of the new government is to prepare to take over the six-month rotating presidency of the European Union on July 1. This urgency also contributed to the fast pace of getting the government together.

Teivo Teivainen
World Politics Review

Click here to subscribe to our weekly newsletters in English and or French. You will receive one email every Monday containing links to all articles published in the last 7 days.