Increasing basic security and family benefits

Key points of the debate

Parliament debated increases to basic security benefits and child benefit as part of combating poverty and supporting demographic trends. The government parties considered it important to target the limited increases primarily at single parents and large families, who are at the greatest risk of poverty. The opposition considered the benefit increases welcome, but called for child benefit to be increased starting from the first child as well as for a child tax deduction.

• –Should the increase in child benefit be targeted only at single parents and large families, or at all children starting from the first?
• –Will benefit increases help reverse the birth rate, or are employment measures and family services needed?
• –Would a child tax deduction be a justified way to support families with children?

• Social DemocratsIn favour

  The proposal turns the direction around and tackles inequality by shifting the focus from last-resort social assistance to primary benefits. The increase in child benefit is appropriately targeted at the groups at greatest risk of poverty.

  ”Sosiaaliturvajärjestelmän kokonaisuuden kannalta on tarkoituksenmukaista siirtää painopistettä viimesijaisesta toimeentulotuesta ensisijaisiin etuuksiin.”

• Centre PartyIn favour

  Level increases to basic security and benefits are necessary to improve the livelihood of the most vulnerable and to reduce dependence on social assistance. It is justified to target scarce resources at single parents and large families, who need support the most.

  ”Valiokunta pitää ehdotettuja parannuksia ensisijaisiin etuuksiin tarpeellisina pienituloisten toimeentulon parantamiseksi ja toimeentulotuen tarpeen vähentämiseksi.”

• GreensIn favour

  Society must look after the most vulnerable, and the proposed increases are targeted precisely at the families and single parents who need support the most.

  ”Näillä muutoksilla tukea ja huolenpitoa saataisiin kohdennettua sitä eniten tarvitseville perheille sekä pyritään vähentämään eriarvoisuutta.”

• Left AllianceIn favour

  Targeting small appropriations at large and single-parent families is justified because child poverty is highest among them. At the same time, child benefit should be increased substantially in the future and tied to an index, whereas tax deductions do not help the poorest.

  ”Jottei jää väärää käsitystä, niin minä kannatan lapsilisien reipasta kasvattamista ja sitomista mahdollisimman anteliaaseen indeksiin.”

• National Coalition PartyIn favour with reservations

  Benefit increases are justified first aid for poverty, but the child benefit increase should have been directed already to the first child. To improve birth rates and family coping, what is needed above all is employment and lower taxation on labour rather than income transfers.

  ”Lapsilisien korottaminen ensiapuna lapsiperheköyhyyteen on sinänsä perusteltua, varsinkin yksinhuoltajaperheille.”

• Finns PartyIn favour with reservations

  Improvements to basic security are welcome in themselves, but the child benefit increase should be targeted already from the first child to encourage all families. In addition, families with children should be supported by reinstating the child tax deduction in earned income taxation.

  ”Hallituksen esityksessä on kannatettavia asioita, mutta siellä on myös seikkoja, joihin me perussuomalaiset olemme esittäneet vastalauseen.”

• Christian DemocratsIn favour with reservations

  Supporting families with children is welcome, but the child benefit increase should be extended to all families. A one-off baby bonus of 1,000 euros and a child tax deduction should also be introduced for families.

  ”Kristillisdemokraattisen eduskuntaryhmän mielestä lapsilisän korotus pitäisi kuitenkin ulottaa koskemaan kaikkia perheitä.”

This digest was generated by AI from 57 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record.