HE 121/2022 vpPassed with amendmentsSubmitted 5 Sep 2022

Third supplementary budget for 2022

The third supplementary budget for 2022

The third supplementary budget for 2022, introducing amendments to the central government budget for the current year. The votes mainly concern individual appropriation items and proposals in dissenting opinions tabled by the opposition.

Status: Passed with amendments
Submitted: 5 Sep 2022
Latest event: 15 Sep 2022
Votes: 4
Speeches: 52
Statute: 824/2022
Source: eduskunta.fi ↗

How Parliament voted

The budget is not voted on as a whole. Parliament voted 4 times on individual appropriations and opposition alternatives, and the budget was adopted on the basis of those votes.

A passed act does not enter into force immediately: the President of the Republic confirms it, and it enters into force on the date set in the act.

Debate in the chamber

What was argued and where each group stood, followed by MPs' speeches verbatim from the parliamentary record. Speeches are shown in their original language.

52 speeches · 2 debates

Key points of the debate

Parliament debated the government proposal for a loan and guarantee authorisation of 10 billion euros to safeguard the solvency of energy companies and the security of supply amidst the crisis in the electricity derivatives market. The proposal was widely considered an essential emergency solution to stabilise the electricity market, but the debate featured disputes over taxpayer risks, the strictness of loan terms and mistakes in past energy policy.

Are the terms and collateral requirements of the central government loan and guarantee programme strict enough to protect taxpayers?
How should the EU intervene in the pricing of electricity and natural gas as well as the rules governing derivatives markets?
How have state ownership steering and energy policy affected the situation of Fortum and the Finnish electricity market?

Social DemocratsIn favour
The Social Democrats supported the proposal to safeguard the electricity market and citizens' access to electricity in an exceptional situation, emphasising the need to also establish a price cap at the EU level.
”Valtiovarainvaliokunta pitää esitystä tässä tilanteessa perusteltuna ja tarkoituksenmukaisena ja puoltaa sen hyväksymistä eräin huomautuksin ja muutosehdotuksin.”
— Johannes Koskinen
Centre PartyIn favour
The Centre Party considered the proposal an essential measure to ensure security of supply and access to electricity, stressing that the loan terms were stringent and that the programme serves only as a backstop of last resort.
”Tämä nyt käsittelyssä oleva laina- ja takausvaltuus ja sen syynä oleva sähkön johdannaispörssin levoton häiriötila ovat kaikki seurauksia — sota ja kohonnut energiahinta ovat syitä.”
— Annika Saarikko
GreensIn favour
The Greens considered the proposal a necessary precaution to stabilise the electricity market, while stressing a swift transition to clean energy away from fossil fuel dependence.
”Sähkömarkkinatuki on tarkoitettu aivan viimesijaiseksi keinoksi turvata kansalaisten ja yritysten sähkönsaantia.”
— Mirka Soinikoski
Left AllianceIn favour
The Left Alliance supported the proposal to safeguard critical energy infrastructure and household heating, welcoming the terms of the loans and the ban on dividend payouts.
”Emme voi päästää yhteiskunnan toimivuuden ja turvallisuuden sekä ihmisten perustarpeiden kannalta välttämättömiä toimijoita kaatumaan.”
— Pia Lohikoski
Swedish People's PartyIn favour
The Swedish People's Party considered the emergency financing package fully justified to safeguard security of supply and pointed out that it is a strictly conditioned loan rather than direct aid.
”Hallituksen hätärahoituspaketti on välttämätön energiatuotannon ja huoltovarmuuden turvaamiseksi.”
— Anders Norrback
National Coalition PartyIn favour with reservations
The National Coalition Party viewed the programme as a necessary evil to calm the market, but expressed grave concern over the risks to taxpayers and called for amendments to EU-level collateral rules.
”Eikö tämä tehdä, arvon ministeri Saarikko, nimenomaan juuri siksi, että sähköyhtiöt eivät saa markkinoilta lainaa ja eivät saa lainaa sen takia, että siihen liittyy liian iso riski?”
— Timo Heinonen
Finns PartyIn favour with reservations
The Finns Party considered the loan package necessary to safeguard national ownership, but submitted a dissenting opinion demanding mandatory collateral or equity ownership for the loans, as well as measures to lower electricity prices.
”Tämä lainatakuuesitys sitten vastaa selvään ongelmaan ja on siis sinällään täysin ymmärrettävä.”
— Riikka Purra
Christian DemocratsIn favour with reservations
The Christian Democrats considered the loan facility essential, but voiced concern over taxpayer risks, the lack of collateral and the prior handling of Fortum's situation.
”Millä me pystymme varmistamaan, että suomalaiset veronmaksajat eivät yhä suurempaa siivua ole ottamassa Saksan energiamarkkinoitten virheistä ja saksalaisen energiapolitiikan virheestä?”
— Sari Essayah
Power Belongs to the PeopleAgainst
Power Belongs to the People opposed the support package, arguing that the crisis was self-inflicted by Finland's and the EU's own sanctions and energy policies.
”Nyt puhutaan siis itse aiheutetusta energiakriisistä ja siitä, kuinka sen varjolla Suomen kansa laitetaan taas maksumieheksi ja ‑naiseksi.”
— Ano Turtiainen

This digest was generated by AI from 52 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record.