Immigration and immigrants have been a hot topic in political discussions—on newspaper pages, in politicians’ speeches, and even at gas station cafés. Unfortunately, the debate has been overly black and white, with extreme viewpoints and a certain level of fanaticism dominating both sides, while fact-based, issue-oriented discussions have been pushed to the background.
First and foremost, immigration should be discussed more openly, including its challenges, without sweeping concerns under the rug or immediately resorting to accusations of racism. At the same time, it is important to avoid generalizing all immigration, as there are many different types of immigrants, and each individual is unique.
While immigration is often framed as the arrival of certain ethnic minorities in the Nordics, it also includes Western migration within the EU, as well as distinct categories such as refugee asylum, work-based immigration, and professional relocation. Whether an immigrant is an Indian engineer at Nokia, an American professional volleyball player, or a Somali refugee, they all fall under the broad umbrella of immigration.
Work-Based Immigration
Work-based immigration is becoming essential for Finland, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. In the coming years, even in South Savo, there will be significant challenges in securing enough labor for social and healthcare services.
In the fall of 2010, the South Savo branch of the National Coalition Party (Kokoomus) addressed this issue, emphasizing that regional employment efforts should focus on hiring young people and creating job opportunities for local job seekers. However, work-based immigration will still be necessary to fill gaps in the region’s social and healthcare workforce. Kokoomus also highlighted the importance of considering labor mobility within the EU as part of South Savo’s workforce strategy.
In other words, recruitment efforts should prioritize EU countries while maintaining strict education and qualification standards. Additionally, sufficient language proficiency is crucial, particularly in the social and healthcare sectors.
When in Rome, Do as the Romans Do
Public discourse on immigration, however, tends to focus more on asylum seekers and refugees rather than work-based migration. This is the group most commonly referred to when discussing “immigrants.”
Isolating immigrants from Finnish society only exacerbates problems. Those granted asylum should be integrated into Finnish society—not the other way around. Finnish society should not be reshaped to accommodate immigrants; instead, immigrants should adapt to Finnish customs and norms.
I have been concerned by the trend of abandoning Finnish traditions in the name of tolerance, as if integration means changing our own way of life to make immigrants feel more at home. But that is not what tolerance or integration should be about.
The old saying, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do,” is a strong guiding principle, and following it should not be seen as offensive. As Jyrki Katainen aptly put it in December: “Tolerance does not mean giving up our own traditions out of politeness toward others.”
Challenges of the Asylum Process
There are also many abuses within the asylum system, and this is a problem that should not be ignored. Finland’s asylum policies and benefits should be aligned with those of other EU countries—or at the very least, with the other Nordic nations—so that Finland is not seen as a more attractive destination than others. The goal should be for all countries to follow the same rules. To reduce abuse, financial support for asylum seekers should be minimized during the application process, focusing instead on basic maintenance rather than monetary assistance.
Those truly in need of protection are unlikely to choose their destination based on available benefits, but it is easy to see how a more generous system could attract individuals looking to exploit it. Some applicants know they will be denied asylum but still choose to come, staying in Finland and receiving benefits while awaiting a decision. The more unnecessary applications there are, the longer it takes to process all cases, creating a bureaucratic cycle that benefits no one.
It’s also important to recognize that fraudulent applications drain resources from those who are genuinely in need of asylum—the very people the system was designed to help.
The processing of asylum and residence permit applications should be expedited, but not by loosening criteria. Additionally, those who receive a negative asylum decision should be repatriated as quickly as possible. Those granted asylum or residence should also be encouraged to return voluntarily once conditions in their home country have improved to a safe level.
The Need for Open Discussion
The topic of immigration requires open and level-headed discussion. Hopefully, a more fact-based and issue-focused debate will gain traction in both politics and the media, rather than being dominated by emotional extremes. As long as the media continues to highlight only the most polarizing views, immigration issues will remain difficult to address constructively. Extremes only fuel each other when given too much attention. Let’s hope that common sense and reason ultimately take center stage in this debate.