Budget for 2021

Key points of the debate

The debate on the 2021 budget was sharply divided between the Government and the opposition. The government parties defended the stimulative, debt-financed budget as a necessary way to support municipalities, businesses and citizens through the coronavirus crisis. The opposition, for its part, strongly criticised the Government for substantial debt accumulation, a lack of genuine employment measures and tax increases.

• –Are the Government's employment measures and compulsory education reform sufficient to balance the economy?
• –Should the recovery from the crisis take place through tax cuts or by increasing public spending?
• –Is historically high borrowing justified under the pretext of the coronavirus crisis?

• Social DemocratsIn favour

  The Social Democrats defended the stimulative budget, which was seen as safeguarding day-to-day services, municipal operating capacity and trust in society amid the coronavirus pandemic.

  ”Sen vuoksi nyt täytyy taloutta, yrityksiä, kuntia, niitä ammattilaisia siellä etulinjassa tukea.”

• Centre PartyIn favour

  The Centre Party considered borrowing necessary under exceptional circumstances and praised the budget's investments in industrial competitiveness, healthcare and the survival of municipalities.

  ”Keskusta sanoo: kyllä Suomi selviytyy.”

• GreensIn favour

  The Greens supported the budget because it avoids the austerity policies of previous crises and invests in the future, education and the green transition.

  ”Me olemme valinneet, että emme leikkaa koulutuksesta tai sosiaaliturvasta vaan panostamme niihin, ja se on ainoa oikea tapa tukea heitä, jotka tarvitsevat apuamme eniten.”

• Left AllianceIn favour

  The Left Alliance supported the budget proposal because it strengthens the welfare state and municipalities and creates long-term equality by extending compulsory education.

  ”Vahva hyvinvointivaltio on pitänyt huolta suomalaisten terveydestä ja toimeentulosta.”

• Swedish People's PartyIn favour

  The Swedish People's Party supported the budget as a responsible crisis policy that ensures citizens' wellbeing and preserves Finnish jobs.

  ”Regeringen har idkat en ansvarsfull politik under coronakrisen.”

• National Coalition PartyAgainst

  The National Coalition Party criticised the proposal for postponing necessary structural reforms and failing to deliver tax cuts that support employment and entrepreneurship.

  ”Siksi hallituksen budjettiesityksen pääviesti on hyytävä.”

• Finns PartyAgainst

  The Finns Party opposed the budget due to excessive borrowing, tightening taxation and measures it considered ineffective, such as extending compulsory education.

  ”Kuitenkin, valtiovarainministeri Matti Vanhanen, oppositio ei hyväksy hallituksen 10,8 miljardin velanottoa.”

• Christian DemocratsAgainst

  The Christian Democrats opposed the proposal, arguing that the Government's employment measures fall short and that paying the cost of the coronavirus crisis requires easing taxation on labour.

  ”Veronkiristyksillä työllisyys ei parane vaan päinvastoin se heikkenee.”

• Movement NowAgainst

  Movement Now criticised the large budget deficit, the increased costs for motorists and businesses, and rhetoric that creates confrontation.

  ”Aloitetaan sillä, että budjetti on 12 miljardia alijäämäinen.”

• Turtiainen groupAgainst

  The Turtiainen group opposed policy based on taking on debt and demanded cuts to the public sector and making entrepreneurship easier by lowering value added tax (VAT).

  ”Velkaantumalla saatava hyvinvointi on itsensä ja tulevien sukupolvien pettämistä.”

This digest was generated by AI from 1183 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record. The longest speeches were shortened in the digest's source material.