Second supplementary budget for 2025

Key points of the debate

The debate focused on central government's accelerating debt accumulation, declining tax revenue estimates, and the success of the Government's economic and employment policies. Although the investments in defence and security in the proposal received broad cross-party support, the opposition and the Government held sharply conflicting views on the overall economic approach. The proposal sparked considerable controversy.

• –Is the accelerating debt accumulation of central government caused by external economic conditions or the Government's economic policy?
• –Are tax cuts targeted at high earners and corporations justified in a difficult economic situation?
• –Have the Government's employment and fiscal consolidation measures strengthened or weakened the public finances?

• National Coalition PartyIn favour

  The National Coalition Party supported the proposal and considered it important that funds are allocated to security, support for Ukraine, and investments in business and transport. The group emphasised that the Government remains committed to its fiscal consolidation targets.

  ”Toimimme Suomen puolesta ja parhaaksi, ja siksi kannatan hallituksen esitystä.”

• Finns PartyIn favour

  The Finns Party considered the supplementary budget to be a necessary and responsible package that responds to the changed international situation by strengthening defence, border security, and preparedness. Increased borrowing was seen as resulting from difficult international economic conditions and reduced tax revenues rather than the Government's actions.

  ”Kokonaisturvallisuuden varjeleminen on hallituksen keskeinen tehtävä. Meidän täytyy pitää huolta niin sisäisestä kuin ulkoisesta turvallisuudesta.”

• Social DemocratsAgainst

  The Social Democrats criticised the supplementary budget on the grounds that central government borrowing is increasing and tax revenues are plummeting as a result of failed economic and employment policies. While supporting the defence investments, the group opposed cuts alongside planned tax relief for high earners and large corporations.

  ”Se on totta, miljardi otetaan lisää velkaa. Ja se tietenkin selittyy sillä, että hallituksen talous- ja työllisyyspolitiikka, tämä saksipolitiikka, vain ei ole toiminut eikä toimi.”

• Centre PartyAgainst

  The Centre Party expressed deep concern over record central government indebtedness and the erosion of the tax revenue base. According to the group, the Government's measures have not delivered the promised economic growth, and debt-funded tax cuts were considered unsustainable, although individual spending targets were welcomed.

  ”Mutta olen sen sijaan suuresti huolissani siitä, mikä tämä yleinen kuva meillä talouden tasapainon suhteen tämänkin lisätalousarvioesityksen jälkeen on.”

• GreensAgainst

  The Greens criticised the ballooning debt burden and considered the tax decisions outlined in the Government's mid-term policy review, such as cuts to corporate tax, to be expensive and poorly justified. The group called for more cost-effective measures and investments in climate and nature targets.

  ”Sen hintalappu on valtava ja tutkimusnäyttö sen tueksi hataraa.”

• Left AllianceAgainst

  The Left Alliance considered the Government's economic and employment policy to have failed completely, arguing that cuts have deepened the recession and increased unemployment and poverty. The party opposed increasing borrowing to finance tax cuts for the wealthy and called for a more active employment policy.

  ”Lisätalousarvio kertoo ennen kaikkea Suomen talouden huonosta tilanteesta.”

This digest was generated by AI from 53 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record.