Postponing municipal elections to June 2021

Key points of the debate

Parliament debated postponing the 2021 municipal elections from April to June due to the worsening coronavirus situation. The majority of parliamentary groups considered the postponement a necessary measure to guarantee health safety and the equal exercise of the right to vote. However, the proposal prompted sharp criticism of the Government's late preparations, and part of the opposition opposed delaying the elections.

• –Was postponing the elections necessary to guarantee health safety?
• –Should the Ministry of Justice and the Government have prepared for coronavirus-safe elections much earlier?
• –Does postponing the elections at the last minute undermine trust in democracy and the electoral system?

• Social DemocratsIn favour

  The group considered delaying the elections the only responsible solution in the worsened epidemic situation, ensuring that no one's right to vote would be compromised by quarantines or fear of infection.

  ”Mielestäni vaalien siirto kesäkuulle on perusteltua ja kannatettavaa.”

• Centre PartyIn favour

  The group supported postponing the elections because the progress of vaccinations and summer conditions would make voting safer and support good voter turnout.

  ”Nyt olemme kuitenkin tässä tilanteessa, enkä pidä siirtoa parilla kuukaudella oikeusvaltionkaan näkökulmasta mitenkään dramaattisena asiana.”

• GreensIn favour

  The group considered the postponement justified due to the serious disease situation caused by virus variants, ensuring that the right to vote and health safety could be comprehensively guaranteed.

  ”Kuntavaalit siirrettiin kesäkuulle, koska virusvariantit muuttivat koronapelin sääntöjä taas kerran.”

• Left AllianceIn favour

  The group supported the postponement as a broadly prepared solution to ensure that risk groups and older people would feel confident and be able to go to the polls.

  ”On arvokasta, että tämän esityksen taustalla on laaja parlamentaarinen valmistelu ja yhteisymmärrys.”

• Swedish People's PartyIn favour

  The group considered postponing the elections a necessary and responsible measure based on expert assessments, protecting the life and health of voters and enabling everyone to participate.

  ”Hallituksen esityksessä ehdotetaan siksi, että kuntavaalit siirretään pidettäviksi 13.6.”

• National Coalition PartyIn favour with reservations

  The group supported postponing the elections in the prevailing situation as the only responsible, health-safe solution, but sharply criticised the Government's and the ministry's failed and delayed preparations.

  ”Tässä asiassa on kaksi ylitse muiden, ja ne ovat ihmisten terveysturvallisuus ja vaalien laillisuus.”

• Finns PartyAgainst

  The group opposed postponing the elections, considering it an exceptional failure from the perspective of democracy, for which insufficiently solid grounds were presented and which the Government had had a year to prepare for.

  ”Vaalien siirtäminen on äärimmäinen teko.”

• Christian DemocratsIn favour with reservations

  The group considered postponing the elections the right solution in light of the health authorities' assessments to safeguard voter turnout, although it criticised the fact that the decision had been delayed until the last minute.

  ”Tässä tilanteessa vaalien siirtäminen oli kyllä oikea ratkaisu.”

• Turtiainen groupAgainst

  The MP opposed the postponement, arguing that it was based on exaggerated hysteria, and criticised making a legislative amendment only after candidate lists had already been submitted.

  ”Vaalien siirto ei käytännössä ole mikään ongelma, mutta siirtämisen syy ja tapa, miten se toteutetaan, nakertaa koko eduskunnan uskottavuutta.”

This digest was generated by AI from 119 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.