HE 323/2018 vpPassed with amendmentsSubmitted 22 Feb 2019

Supplementary budget for 2019

The 2019 supplementary budget

The supplementary budget for 2019, comprising amendments to the central government budget for the current year. The votes mainly concern individual appropriation items and proposals in the opposition's dissenting opinions.

Status: Passed with amendments
Submitted: 22 Feb 2019
Latest event: 14 Mar 2019
Votes: 24
Speeches: 118
Statute: 303/2019
Source: eduskunta.fi ↗

How Parliament voted

The budget is not voted on as a whole. Parliament voted 24 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.

118 speeches · 2 debates

Key points of the debate

The debate focused in particular on the transfer of funds from the Housing Fund of Finland to capitalise rail companies, as well as the adequacy of additional appropriations for the supervision of elderly care services and the police. The opposition considered using Housing Fund assets to run contrary to Parliament's previous policy stances and viewed the additional investments in elderly care as mere first aid without a binding nurse staffing ratio. The supplementary budget proposal sparked heated debate between the Government and the opposition.

Can assets of the Housing Fund of Finland (ARA) be used to capitalise rail transport project companies?
Are the additional resources allocated for supervising elderly care services sufficient without a statutory nurse staffing ratio?
How should the planning and funding of major rail transport projects be resolved?

National Coalition PartyIn favour
The group supported the proposal and emphasised that employment trends have been strong and economic policy successful. Transferring funds from the Housing Fund to rail companies was seen as important for promoting climate goals, housing construction and smooth mobility.
”Me siirrämme tämän 70 miljoonaa siis valtion raideyhtiöihin. Eli meillä on täällä aivan yhteinen tahto, että me haluamme edistää raideliikennettä, me haluamme torjua ilmastonmuutosta.”
— Petteri Orpo
Centre PartyIn favour
The group supported the priorities of the supplementary budget and considered the swift response to the supervision of elderly care and security to be successful. Capitalising rail companies was deemed essential for future growth and developing transport infrastructure.
”Käsittelyn pohjana oleva lisätalousarvio on lyhyt mutta kuitenkin varsin ajankohtainen, ja se vastaa viime aikoina esillä olleisiin asioihin.”
— Timo Kalli
Blue ReformIn favour
The group supported the appropriation increases in the proposal, considering them justified particularly in strengthening security, youth work and the supervision of services.
”Ylipäätään nämä määrärahalisäykset tässä lisätalousarviossa turvallisuuteen ja turvapaikkapolitiikkaan liittyen ovat hyvin perusteltuja.”
— Simon Elo
Finns PartyIn favour with reservations
The group welcomed the additional resources for online policing and supervision, but considered the measures to have come too late and to be merely inadequate first aid without a statutory nurse staffing ratio.
”Se, että vanhustenhoitoon annetaan lisää valvontaresurssia, on vain ensiapu. Se ei ole ratkaisu.”
— Arja Juvonen
Social DemocratsAgainst
The group opposed taking Housing Fund assets for rail companies and considered it contrary to the will of Parliament, undermining affordable housing. The funding for supervising elderly care was viewed as completely inadequate to address the real problems.
”Minä hämmästelen sitä, miten hallitus voi ihan viime töikseen täysin vastoin eduskunnan täysin yksimielistä kantaa lähteä tähän Valtion asuntorahaston ryöstöretkelle.”
— Pia Viitanen
GreensAgainst
The group considered reallocating Housing Fund assets to other uses a misguided decision at a time of severe shortages in affordable housing. Concern was also voiced about the structural deficit in central government finances.
”En voi ymmärtää sitä, että vastoin eduskunnan päätöstä yli 70 miljoonaa euroa niistätte tästä Valtion asuntorahastosta.”
— Johanna Karimäki
Left AllianceAgainst
The group criticised channelling Housing Fund assets into capitalising companies and called for the money to be spent directly on promoting housing. In addition, significantly greater resources were demanded for elderly care and support for victims of sexual offences.
”Tämä ylimääräinen tuloutus on vastoin kaikkia periaatteita, miten tähän asti on toimittu.”
— Silvia Modig
Swedish People's PartyIn favour
The group supported the supplementary budget, commending the reinforcement of elderly care supervision, additional resources for online policing and funding for the Kvarken transport link project.
”Ruotsalaisen eduskuntaryhmän mukaan on hyvä, että hallituksen lisätalousarviossa on kiinnitetty erityistä huomiota vanhustenhuollon kehittämiseen ja seksuaalirikollisuuden kitkemiseen.”
— Mats Nylund
Christian DemocratsIn favour with reservations
The group commended the investments in the police and supervision, but opposed using Housing Fund assets for other purposes and highlighted the need for more hands-on care staff in elderly care.
”Tästä olen kyllä myös sitä mieltä, ettei pitäisi nyt näitä asuntorahastorahoja ottaa mihinkään muuhun käyttöön kuin siihen, mihin ne on tarkoitettu.”
— Antero Laukkanen

This digest was generated by AI from 118 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.