Pia Kauma – Uusimaa National Coalition Party (EPP)
Who is Pia?
Member of Parliament from Uusimaa. MSc in Economics and Business Administration. Member of the City Council in Espoo and Member of the County Council in the Western Uusimaa Wellbeing Services County.
Several years of leadership experience in the private sector. Married with four children.
”Fiscal discipline, moderate income tax rate, freedom to choose and investments in education, the environment and welfare create the basis for the future of our children.”
Below you can find some of the subjects I keep important in politics:
Jobs and income
Society should always encourage its inhabitants to work rather than be idle. Whether Finland succeeds or not depends on our hard work, on entrepreneurship and on education.
The excessive influence of trade unions needs to be fixed – we need more flexibility and dynamism in our labour markets to create new jobs and opportunities. For example, we could reform our current unemployment funds to better support individuals in finding new jobs.
We as politicians need to make sure that everyone feels safe in our society.
Climate change should be tackled with balanced, effective actions in coordination with other countries.
Living a good life
Everyone should have quick access to high quality healthcare and support when the need arises.
Humanity and quality should be the values that drive our public services.
We can improve our wellbeing by taking care of our environment and by providing sporting opportunities and cultural activities for everyone.
Finland is an integral part of the European Union and the global community. As a small country, we should actively work to uphold the rules-based international order and keep promoting Western, democratic values, such as equality and freedom of expression.
Sustainable solutions – with focus on people
If you have any questions or things on your mind – please let me know! You can contact me at
Earlier news and articles:
I am running for Vice-President of the OSCE PA (summer 2021)
Pia Kauma. London, 2017.
News and Articles
My speech in OSCE PA Webinar on Clean Energy
Honorable Chair, dear colleagues,
Like many of you have already commented the industrial revolution took 100 years, the digital revolution took twenty. As the effects of climate change are becoming more and more evident, time is running up for the energy revolution. The OSCE PA has promoted clean energy transition for decades, but energy demand and pollution keep increasing. Now is the time to turn our commitments into action. If we want to reach the Sustainable Development Goal 7 on clean and green energy by 2030, we have no more time to waste.
Oil and gas rich countries, such as Russia and Kazakhstan have built their entire societies and economies to depend on income from fossil energy sources. Yet, the cost on nature and people’s health has been severe. In some Central Asian cities, children are kept inside because the air is too dangerous to breathe. At the same time, the potential to shift to clean and green energy is huge in the region. So instead of using energy as a political tool for pressure and national advantages these countries should focus on finding new technical solutions for a greener economy. Deeper energy cooperation in the region would benefit these countries’ economies, their people and their societies as a whole. Sure, it requires unpopular and difficult political decisions, risk taking and heavy investments to start with. In order to make clean energy affordable for all, states might have to subsidize renewable energy in the beginning. But in the long run, it leads to improved health, a cleaner environment, new job opportunities and prosperity.
Single source reliance on energy also comes with great risks to national security. In a digitalized world our dependence on energy has reached new levels. Nowadays all basic functions for a normal life require electricity. This makes energy production facilities easy targets for terrorists. Energy disruption caused by a well-targeted terrorist act could bring chaos and disaster into any society also in Europe. New technologies make it easier to carry out such attacks. For example, there have been several drone attacks on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia. Also, my home country Finland had to take the risk of terrorism into consideration when building its latest nuclear power plant.
At the same time, climate change in itself can become a driver for terrorist acts and radicalization as the loss of livelihood cause people to despair. Desperate people with few prospects for the future are vulnerable to terrorist recruitment. In Mali, terrorist groups have exploited growing tensions between herders and farmers for recruitment, whilst in Iraq and Syria, ISIS have used water shortages to increase recruitment efforts. As more and more people will suffer from the effects of climate change the risk to global security will increase. Each country should weigh these risks when deciding on their energy infrastructure. Source diversity, energy efficiency, less energy dependence, clean and smart technologies are possible solutions to this threat.
The interlinkage between securing energy supplies and stable and secure economies and societies is strong. As parliamentarians, we must safeguard our societies and promote accessible and affordable clean energy resources for all our citizens.
The transition to clean energy will lead to more secure and fairly distributed energy resources. It will reduce the impact of energy upon the climate.
We must urgently work together to find joint solutions. The best technological innovations have come from the work of multinational teams and international cooperation. Energy can be stopped at the border, but its polluting effects cannot. Any country’s decision not to transition to clean energy will have an impact on the entire globe.
Panicking is never the answer, but we need a sense of urgency. Saving costs by doing nothing today will come at an immense and irreversible cost tomorrow.
OSCE PA leaders urge peaceful resolution of unrest in Kazakhstan
COPENHAGEN, 6 January 2022 – OSCE PA President Margareta Cederfelt (MP, Sweden) and Special Representative on Central Asia Pia Kauma (MP, Finland), today expressed concern over recent developments in Kazakhstan, deplored the loss of life, and called upon all sides to exert restraint, refrain from the use of violence and resort to dialogue to resolve grievances.
“I am following the developments in Kazakhstan with concern, and remind all parties of the need to refrain from violence, pursue dialogue and respect fundamental freedoms,” said President Cederfelt. “It’s important to support a peaceful solution, and as a strong proponent of the OSCE, it is essential that Kazakhstan abides by OSCE commitments.”
Special Representative Kauma, who also serves as OSCE PA Vice-President, deplored the loss of life on both sides and urged all sides to refrain from further escalation.
“I condemn the use of violence and call upon all sides to de-escalate, engage in dialogue and utilize democratic institutions,” Kauma said. “A peaceful resolution of the current state of emergency must be found, with full respect for fundamental rights and freedoms including peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. I stand ready to facilitate engagement with all sides.”
Kauma and Cederfelt have also discussed pursuing additional courses of action including facilitating dialogue within the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, and reminded all parties that the OSCE remains a vital forum for resolution of disputes.
MP Pia Kauma running for Vice-President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly 7/2021
The Finnish delegation to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly has nominated Member of Parliament Pia Kauma (National Coalition Party) for the post of Vice-President of the Parliamentary Assembly.
Kauma is currently the Special Representative of the Parliamentary Assembly for Civil Society Engagement and a member of the Counter-Terrorism Committee. She has previously served as a rapporteur for the Parliamentary Assembly’s Political Committee and led OSCE Parliamentary Assembly election observers in the parliamentary elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Georgia.
The Plenary Session of the Parliamentary Assembly will elect 8 Vice-Presidents on 6th July.
Helsinki Times – The matriculation examination should be offered in English
Finland and Finns are becoming more international. English is the general language of science and international interaction. At the end of 2019, almost one in ten (9.1%) of all Finnish children had a foreign background. The proportion of children with a foreign background has grown steadily since the 1980s.
The supply of basic education with English as the language of education has expanded significantly. At the same time, the demand for courses held in English also in upper secondary education has increased. That is why it has become more and more important to allow students to take also the matriculation examination in English. This would serve especially those Finnish returnees who have been in English or bilingual primary and secondary education and those for whom the strongest academic language is English. In addition, it would help young people who have moved to Finland because of their parents’ work.
For those who might criticize the plan because of financial reasons, I would like to point out that the costs would not differ from teaching in Finnish, provided that the group sizes are large enough. And for those who say that we do not need this as we already have an English matriculation exam, namely the International Baccalaureat, I would like to say that it is not the same thing. The Finnish Matriculation Examination is arranged by a national body, the Matriculation Examination Board, whereas the IB Diploma, which is available in several Finnish schools, is organized by International Baccalaureate Organization. The IB program has been criticized for being expensive with its annual fees and for its inflexibility when it comes to choosing different subjects for the curriculum.
The new Finnish matriculation exam in English would in any case give more options for those who like to consider non-traditional options. It would also make it easier for hundreds of students to access Finnish universities many of which already have English-language Bachelor’s and Master’s programs available.
It would also be reasonable to take some concrete measures to help promote Finnish educational exports. With help of our official matriculation examination in English, we would be able to take a long leap towards increasing our educational export, which has been an undisputed objective for Finland already for a long time.
The National Coalition Party has promoted the idea of matriculation exam in English already since the Sipilä administration (2015-2019), but unfortunately, it has not gained momentum. One of the reasons is political. Namely, the left-wing government has considered the idea to be too elitist and exclusive.
We need internationalization, international experts, and international export products in Finland. The truth is that we cannot attract international experts with such attributes as good climate or central location. Instead, our strengths lie in a safe and clean living environment. One of the cornerstones of Finnish society has been education, but in the future, it has to withstand international comparison even more. We cannot let the language become an obstacle for us. Not in the field of education, but not in the area of export opportunities either.
Pia Liisa Kauma is a Finnish politician who serves a member of the City Council of Espoo, representing the National Coalition Party.
19 May 2021
My speech on OSCE Parliamentary Assembly webinar: EVIDENCE-BASED LAW MAKING TO PREVENT VIOLENECE AGAINST WOMEN
Mrs. Chairperson, Dear Experts,
Thank you for organizing this webinar on evidence-based law making to prevent violence against women. In these times when Turkey has decided to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention we must highlight the benefits of the convention and focus on ways to protect women from violence. I have been involved in several activities in the Parliament of Finland with the aim of improving legislation in this area.
According to data, violence against women is one of the most serious human rights problems in Finland. Nearly half of all women over 15 have experienced some form of violence or sexual abuse. To tackle this, Finland has signed and ratified the Istanbul Convention, but that is just a start. The big job is implementation. Despite a quite good situation there is still some way to go.
I have personally raised the issue of forced marriages. Despite the provisions in article 37 of the Istanbul Convention, Finland does not have separate legislation to prohibit forced marriages. The Finnish authorities have claimed that the issue is covered by other legislation, but evidence has shown that it is lacking. For instance, it is not possible to nullify a marriage, which could put some women in grave danger. Neither does the legislation recognize non-legal marriages, which in some cultures are seen as equally binding as legal ones.
Just two weeks ago the Human Rights Network of my Parliament sent a letter to the Justice Minister reminding her of Finland’s commitment to right these injustices. We will continue until we see change. In fact, Finnish MPs have managed to change the course of governments decisions through their work in parliamentary assemblies. Finland’s signing of the Istanbul Convention in 2015 was a result of such an effort, as was additional funding for safe houses during budget discussions.
The pandemic has shown that violence against women is still a major problem in all countries. When the lockdown hit last year, many saw spikes in domestic violence cases. France reported a rise of 25 %, the UK 9 % and Finland 6 %. Yet, few women were able to get help due to restrictions. In the worst case, the home that was supposed to protect them from Covid became a life-threatening place for them. As decision-makers we have a responsibility to ensure that help services and safe houses are operational in all circumstances regardless of lockdowns and restrictions.
Helsinki Times 6 March 2021
We need concrete actions to Improve home care services for the elderly
Home care services are wrestling with deep problems. The population is aging, and the number of home care customers is increasing. Approximately 200 000 individuals received home care in Finland in 2019. The condition of elderly people in home care is getting worse and many are not able to manage their daily chores without outside help. Due to COVID-19, seniors have been asked to isolate themselves in their homes without being able to get as much help from their close ones as they would in a world without the pandemic.
Furthermore, the lack of resources regarding the nursing staff is unbearable. This is emphasized by the experience nurses are reporting – the workload is extremely large and exhausting. Therefore, I am not surprised that we are constantly reading news about seniors forgotten in their homes, how vital medicines have been left undistributed, and about increased number of overall complaints to the authorities.
The problem in our home care services is a cautionary example about a situation where we can end up if we do not make timely and determined decisions. When we in the Coalition Party’s alternative budget proposed an additional investment of 50 million euros in home care for the elderly, the current government responded with a shrug. With the additional investment in question, we would have been able to hire a thousand more nurses.
Elderly people in home care, their relatives, and home care workers have been waiting for too long to obtain solutions to these problems. In the Coalition Party, we have persistently urged the government for an overall reform of the services for the elderly, so that the elderly would not be left waiting for reforms concerning them. However, the current government has shown its order of priority. The planned legislation will not be completed for at least two more years from now.
In addition, the government must also ensure that the care-sector remains attractive as a career choice. The work must receive the credit and prestige it truly deserves.
In my opinion, every elderly person deserves adequate security, care, and valued years of elderly age. It does not fit in my sense of justice that those who have paid their taxes for years are the ones who are left out to dry during times when they need help the most. It is important that as many seniors as possible can live in the comfort of their own homes if it is the most comprehensive and safest solution for them.
Now is the time to take the discussed matters and create concrete action on these issues. Especially during these difficult times, we need to take care of each other. Regardless of the age.
Helsinki Times 25 November 2020
Finnish MPs observed the American Presidential Elections; express mixed hopes for future administration
In addition to human rights experts from ODIHR, more than 70 election monitors were sent to the USA by the OSCE.
Election observers were sent to seven states plus Washington, D.C. Leading up to Election Day, the ODIHR had been observing a broader scope of the election process as part of a long-term observation mission, including campaign financing, freedom of the press, and early voting operations.
Junnila, who is the chairman of the Finnish delegation to the OSCE PA, felt it was his mission to participate. He has observed elections in many countries, including those with fledgling democracies.
Junnila visited a dozen polling sites in Wisconsin, one of the battleground states that Trump won in 2016 against former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, but that Joe Biden flipped in 2020. Trump has asked for a recount of population centres that had a high percentage of Biden votes in Wisconsin to dispute Biden’s victory. “My group concentrated on Kenosha, Milwaukee and Racine,” Junnila explains, “but of course we also met with a wide variety of different officials, researchers, and party officials.”
Junnila explained why he was particularly drawn to those sites: “The OSCE PA hand-picked the locations based on input from long-term observers, but I was able to influence our secretariat to consider Kenosha and Racine counties in Wisconsin. My group was the only one going there. Kenosha became known for the riots after the death of Jacob Blake and Racine is known as a bellwether county. They have voted for the president in every election except in 1988, well, until now.”
Junnila describes some of the rare individual problems that occur in the U.S. electoral process. “Dead people voted. Ballot-harvesting. People voted twice. People voted in a state they no longer lived. Party observers were not allowed inside some locations. There were errors in counting. Filling of missing addresses to some of the ballots after the polling station had closed,” he describes but concludes that these instances were not widespread enough to alter the outcome of the election. That is because it is not unusual to find individual instances of voting impropriety, however, these are not significant enough to change the outcome of elections wherein the margins are so large. “Problems and abuses were not detected on a scale that the campaigns suggest,” stated Junnila in a press release from the OSCE PA, “Voting on election day and the counting of advance votes has generally proceeded properly.”
Kauma visited three polling places in Washington, D.C, and six polling sites just outside of the city in Arlington, Virginia, and described that she had been in the nation of Georgia observing their parliamentary elections until 31 October 2020, which influenced why she ended up observing election offices there. “I decided to stay there in order to avoid too much heavy traveling. And I had been there also in the 2012 and 2014 elections as an observer. It felt like a good idea to make a comparison.”
When election observers from the OSCE PA arrive, she explained, they are briefed on a comprehensive report from the ODIHR, as well as members of the Republican and Democratic Parties, on their findings of what has occurred leading up to the election, as well as what they should pay special attention to when visiting polling sites.
Kauma has a keen interest in supporting democracies by serving as an election observer. “I think that the most important thing regarding elections that we do as politicians in Finland is to look outside our borders. Going to another country to observe their elections and learn about their political system gives you both an idea of what is happening in those countries, as well as food for thought about your own country.”
Biden won both the national popular vote and the majority of electoral college votes. The final electoral college tally was for President-elect Biden at 306-232, flipping Republican President Trump’s 2016 result against Clinton. Trump has refused to concede the election accusing election officials of vast voter fraud, claiming that he was the rightful winner of the election. Kauma disagrees, “I think it is wrong for Trump to challenge the results. In countries like the U.S., where the system relies on the rule of law, you have to bring proof if you claim fraud.”
Although the election was called by most news sources the Saturday following the election, after Democratic President-elect Joe Biden secured the electoral votes necessary to win the election, there is still a period of “canvassing,” which involves counting every ballot, verifying that each ballot is valid, and auditing the results of the election before the results are certified by each state.
Kauma explained that the exceptionally high number of absentee and mail-in ballots due to COVID-19 altered the attendance at polling sites she visited. “Normally, there would be a lot of people at the polling stations on Election Day,” she said, “but this time there were only a handful of people there because most people had already voted. That is perhaps why it is taking so long to count the ballots.”
Junnila described the stark difference between polling places in urban centres versus rural locations. “In the cities [polling sites] were orderly with not too many people in the queue, but in the countryside, it was very busy,” he said. “Of course, this was expected, since most of the Democratic voters voted absentee and the Republicans were expected to turn out to vote on Election Day.”
On the night of the election, Trump prematurely claimed victory in a speech fraught with lies and accusations. Strangely enough, he demanded that the counting of ballots be stopped in Michigan and Pennsylvania, where Biden’s lead slowly overtook Trump’s as mail-in ballots began to be processed and counted, but he asked that Arizona “count every vote,” where the remaining ballots were expected to be predominately voters registered to the Republican Party.
In stark contrast to Trump’s speech, Joe Biden refused to claim victory on the night of the election, instead calling for patience to allow that every vote be counted. This was a message echoed by Michael Georg Link, special coordinator and leader of the short-term OSCE observer mission: “Nobody – no politician, no elected official – should limit the people’s right to vote. Coming after such a highly dynamic campaign, making sure that every vote is counted is a fundamental obligation for all branches of government.”
8 December 2020 is the deadline for resolving election disputes at the state level, including all recounts and court contests, where Trump is currently hoping to change the outcome of the election. After that, electors in each state will cast their ballots in the Electoral College according to the winner of the popular vote in each state (with the exception of Nebraska and Maine, where a different approach is used with split electoral votes based on a “congressional district method”). This curious distinction resulted in Trump’s victory in 2016 despite losing the national popular vote to Clinton.
The U.S. does not have a national election standard—it varies from state to state and within each state, county to county, with election boards and commissions granted autonomy to determine their own voting standards.
Junnila spelled out how this might complicate the election process. “The biggest problem with their system is the decentralisation, but I am not sure there is enough political will from the main parties to make any drastic measure to improve it from that point of view. But I hope they do make small improvements to it, because the biggest problem is their lack of trust in the system. I would recommend that they pass a federal law about the registration of voters and improve their census system as well.”
The unique manner in which elections are conducted in the U.S. was acknowledged by Kauma but did not complicate her mission while observing the election process. “The process in the U.S. is very different than in other countries that I’ve visited,” Kauma explained. “If you talk to observers who visited Michigan or California, I’m sure they probably have a different impression based on the rules there. However, when you visit a polling place, it is your job to observe how the election workers are operating under the rules of their state.”
“In the U.S. you talk about elections in a plural sense—there are many elections happening at the same time, for example, for Congress, local elections, laws, school measures,” said Kauma. “When an American voter goes into a polling place to vote they have to take a stance on many things at once. In Finland, we only have to take a stance on one issue at a time.”
In an unprecedented move, Trump withheld millions of dollars in federal funds to Biden meant to aid the peaceful transition from one administration to the next, forcing Biden’s transition committee to seek private donations for their work. After elections officials in Michigan certified Biden’s victory in that state, Trump agreed to release the transition funds and to begin the process of a peaceful transition to the Biden administration, although Trump has expressed a goal of still reversing the election results in the courts.
Junnila does not believe that Trump’s initial refusal to work with the transition team amount to breaking the law. “There is no strict rule that the Trump campaign is actually breaking here. Of course, this is with the expectation of him respecting the firm deadline in December and the deadline given for inauguration.”
Further, Junnila explained that many recounts have yet to be completed. “States like Georgia are just now finishing and confirming their results, so it remains to be seen if [Trump] will make further statewide challenges. But it will be difficult to prove any widespread fraud, because it doesn’t seem to be there—at least not anything major.”
Trump has challenged the results in several states in a variety of lawsuits, attempting to reverse the outcome of the election in his favour, but no court challenge has of yet gained any ground. This has prompted President Trump to adopt a number of different accusations of fraud for each state.
In Pennsylvania, he has asked his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to represent him in federal court to halt Biden’s certification as the winner of the state. In question in that lawsuit are a number of ballots in a number of Pennsylvania counties that allowed voters to “cure,” or correct, technicalities on their mail-in ballots such as forgetting their middle initial on their signature. Despite being fully legal under Pennsylvania elections law, their argument there is that the same option is not offered in counties that favoured Trump. Giuliani’s case was dismissed by the judge, and Pennsylvania certified its election results 24 November 2020.
In Georgia, officials finished a hand recount of 5 million votes and announced confirmation of Biden’s victory on 20 November 2020. The results were certified by election officials in the state.
In a bizarre turn of events in Wayne County, Michigan, which includes Detroit, which is traditionally a perfunctory vote by the local canvassing board to certify election results, two Republican members refused to certify the election in a move meant to support Trump. After backlash pointing out that they had singled out precincts with predominately Black voters, the two members reversed their votes and voted to certify the election. Later, they tried to rescind their votes to certify the results, claiming they felt bullied (their vote is still binding, however, and those results have been certified). One of those voters later admitted that Trump called her to thank her for her efforts to help him, which is a highly unusual point of contact intended to influence an election board member’s decisions. Trump invited Republican leaders of Michigan’s state legislature to the White House to discuss reversing the state’s popular vote, although they certified their results on 23 November 2020.
Many expected Trump to reject the results of the election after he stated that the election would be fraudulent if he lost beginning with the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. As states began to change voting requirements to allow social distancing by voting by mail, Trump began to inaccurately characterise mail-in voting as inherently fraudulent, despite the fact that he himself votes by mail in Florida. This was because mail-in voting tends to favour Democratic candidates over Republicans.
Junnila acknowledges some of the worries but ultimately doesn’t feel they had a significant impact on the results. “Voting by mail in the United States is somewhat troublesome because states have different legislation and deadlines,” he explained, “and considering the registration and verification of voters’ eligibility is challenging. The United States does not have a proper federal identification process, nor do they have a reliable way to verify a voter’s address and so forth. So, yes, I do understand the concerns and this is something they need to address in the future. However, neither we nor the election officials or the party observers noticed anything wide scale that would affect the results of this election.”
Trump’s allegations of fraud leading up to the election did influence the mission of the election observers. “We knew that our task would be even more important because the President was claiming that there would be fraud,” Kauma explains. Kauma describes how eager election workers were to demonstrate the fairness and accuracy of voting when she visited their sites because of Trump’s inflammatory accusations. “We were welcomed at polling stations, said Kauma, explaining that their presence there brought them a sense of security, “The polling station workers welcomed us also in the sense that they felt it was a good idea to have an ‘outside organization’ to make sure that everything goes as planned and report if there is something wrong.”
Junnila did describe a bad experience at a polling site in Racine, Wisconsin. “There was a polling station that was run very strictly, and we were limited in terms of observation. We were also treated very badly and told not to ask any questions. While we still did, some of them turned to another observer from the Democratic Party for answers. It seemed very odd and we underlined it in our internal report.”
The election observers had specific things that they were looking for when visiting polling sites. One of the claims that Trump made was that people could vote twice with a mail-in ballot (he even encouraged his supporters to attempt to do this in North Carolina, which is a felony under US law). “When we visited a site, we would go to the chief election worker at each site and asked them to demonstrate to us how they would know if a voter had already voted,” Kauma describes. “In polling places, they would show us their voter registration list—in some places, it was a physical book, and in others, it was an electronic device like a tablet.” When a voter had voted, that would be indicated on that voter’s registration file. Kauma concludes, “I believe this is a fairly reliable system.”
Trump admitted that it was his goal to slow the delivery of mail-in ballots in an interview with Fox Business Network in August. Referencing two funding sources held by Republican lawmakers in Congress, he said, “If we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money,” Trump told host Maria Bartiromo. “That means they can’t have universal mail-in voting; they just can’t have it.”
In addition to this, Trump used an ally that he appointed as Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service (USPS), Louis DeJoy, to slow the delivery of mail-in ballots. DeJoy made several moves that slowed mail delivery rates, including the removal of mail-sorting machines, ostensibly as a cost-saving measure. However, the backlash over the move was so great that DeJoy was asked to testify before Congress and eventually conceded that he would reverse the cost-cutting measures entirely.
Despite Trump’s efforts to undermine the results in the election, the groups are confident that the election went smoothly.
On a broader note, Kauma said, “No, democracy is not in jeopardy in the U.S. It was important that they didn’t try to postpone the elections. It is a good sign that they kept to their regular election schedule, and I would encourage other countries to find a way to have their elections safely in spite of coronavirus. If they don’t, democracy is at risk. Democracy requires that elections happen on schedule to survive. Those in power will have a tendency to abuse their power if they have the opportunity to.”
Regarding what happens next to the U.S., Junnila is not optimistic. “The Republicans are questioning the viability of the election process and the Democrats think Trump undermines democracy, so you can just feel how the political divide is ever deepening and there is not much either Trump or Biden could do about it—well, except add fuel to the fire,” Junnila said. “There won’t be unity.”
Kauma, however, has hope for Americans, “I don’t see the future as gloomy as Junnila. I think it greatly depends on the new president and his team as a whole, what will happen. Will the political divide grows even deeper or will people find their unity as Americans, not just as Republicans or as Democrats? I think it is possible for the new leader to unify the nation, but it probably will not happen overnight. It will happen gradually, as the world will find its way to recover from the global pandemic.”
Overall, based on the reports of more than 70 observers; the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA), the conclusion was that there were no problems on a large scale and that President Donald Trump’s allegations of widespread electoral fraud were unfounded.
President-elect Biden is expected to be sworn into office on Inauguration Day, 20 January 2021.
For a full list of election results certification deadlines in the United States, click here.
Helsinki Times 15 June 2020
The coronavirus pandemic calls for re-think of what our security of supply entails
Slightly over a year has now passed since the parliamentary elections. Who would have thought last spring that discussions around the world would today be dominated by a single topic? The coronavirus epidemic and how countries are able to get back on their feet from the virus that has paralysed the entire world. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the new coronavirus as a global pandemic on 11 March 2020.
Many European countries appear to have now passed the peak of the pandemic’s first wave. But no one knows whether there will be a second or third wave and what the virus will look like then. Will it adapt and thereby become stronger, or weaker than in the first wave? The countries that have wanted to believe in achieving herd immunity are forced to re-think their approach because getting sick from the coronavirus may not, after all, protect you from getting sick again. There is still so much we don’t know. The entire world is holding its breath for a coronavirus vaccine or, at least, an effective medicine that can halt the progress and evolution of the virus more definitely.
According to the WHO, a total of 108 coronavirus vaccines were being developed in various parts of the world in early May. Eight of them had moved forward to human tests. Finland should take part in international vaccine development efforts, and in March it duly allocates five million euros of its budget to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the International Vaccine Institute (IVI). It’s good to bear in mind that developing a vaccine typically takes at least a year and, once an effective, safe and distributable coronavirus vaccine is ready, it will fly off the shelves at what will probably be a high price. The first group of countries to get their hands on the vaccine will all but surely include those that contributed the most to its development.
Because of global demand, we should press on also with our own development projects. It is also a question of self-sufficiency and security of supply. Two vaccine development projects were underway in Finland in early May, but neither of them was listed by the WHO.
The development work requires money, and so it is good that the Academy of Finland and various foundations have opened application periods for funding for coronavirus-related research projects. Also needed is funding for clinical medical research. State research funding (VTR) has declined from 90 million to slightly over 20 million euros over the past 20 years. We have to reverse that trend.
In Finland, one of the challenges of vaccine development is that the research efforts are scattered across various parties. What we need is a broad-based group tasked with co-ordinating the efforts of universities, hospitals, basic health care, funding institutions, the pharmaceutical industry, and other private and third-sector operators. This way, our broad expertise could be better utilised.
The coronavirus has also provoked debate about the need to secure pharmaceutical self-sufficiency and the functioning of logistics chains by bringing more pharmaceutical and vaccine production from India and China to Europe. Vaccines used to be produced also in Finland, but the production was shut down as too expensive in the early 2000s. It could be worthwhile to re-start it to solidify our self-sufficiency. Whatever the case, we have to re-shape our security of supply and how we have prepared for crises in recent years due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Helsinki Times 21.1.2020: Norway’s lessons prove that our anti-terrorism laws urgently need updating
As I see it, my duty as an MP is to protect our citizens against terrorist attacks and other security-related incidents. In order to prevent terrorism, radicalisation and violent extremism we need to adopt effective legislation and to approve solid budgets that empower our institutions.
An efficient way to keep our legislation up to date is by learning from nations, whose people have already been subjected to terrible and unpredicted terrorist attacks within their borders.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is the largest regional intergovernmental security organisation in the world. I am a member of the counter-terrorism committee in the OSCE’s Parliamentary Assembly. In this capacity, I had the possibility to visit Norway recently and to learn from the terrorist attack which took place on Utøya Island in July 2011.
The visit to Utøya Island was an emotional and striking experience. A man disguised as a police officer shot dead 69 young people at a summer camp of the Labour Party on the 22nd of July. Before the shooting on the island, the perpetrator had exploded a bomb in the city center of Oslo. These terrorist attacks were the worst ever in any Nordic country. As parliamentarians, we paid tribute to the victims at the memorial places both in Utøya and in Oslo and we met with the victims’ families.
In the aftermath of Utøya, Norway discovered it did not have a clear operating model for terrorist attacks. A tragedy of this magnitude had clearly been something that nobody could foresee or prepare for. The perpetrator was a born Norwegian and his violent acts were planned against the open, modern and pluralistic Norwegian way of life. This, more than anything, came as a shock to most Norwegians.
The actions of the authorities during and after the attack have been carefully evaluated afterward. The police were criticized for acting too slowly and inefficiently, whereas the health authorities were praised because they were able to save lives thanks to their effective and well-coordinated actions. A parliamentary committee was set up in order to evaluate what should be have been done differently. Nobody wanted to repeat the same mistakes in the future.
After the terrorist attacks in 2011, the Norwegian police forces have been upgraded and significant improvements in Norway’s counter-terrorism legislation have been made. In 2013, for example, the penal code was amended such that ”participation in” terrorist organisation was criminalised. This is something that has not yet been done in Finland or Sweden.
In Finland, terrorism is usually referred to as something that comes from outside Finnish borders. The Norwegian experience from Utøya, however, shows that terrorism can also be homegrown. Radicalisation is one of the major threats to our society at the moment. Therefore we must enable our authorities to take all necessary actions in order to detect, prevent and combat terrorism in all its forms. In Finland, for instance, the number of police officers per capita is significantly lower than that in Norway.
Having compared our terrorism legislation to some other western countries, I am convinced that our legislation in Finland needs to be strengthened. For this purpose, I left a law initiative in the Finnish Parliament together with one of my colleagues recently. Our goal is to amend the criminal code such that ”belonging to” or ”participation in” a terrorist organisation would be criminalised the same way as for example in Norway, Denmark, and France. The definition of a terrorist organisation would be made according to that of the United Nations’ Security Council and that of the European Union.
Extremism is gaining an increased foothold in our society. Therefore, we have to be particularly vigilant in order not to forget our common goal: to protect our people against all kinds of terrorist threats. National Coalition Party not being a governing party at the moment, I expect that our government in power make all necessary changes to the legislation as well as to our criminal justice system in order to guarantee the security of our citizens.
In the evening of the Utøya attack, the Norwegian prime minister Jan Stoltenberg said it very clearly. ”We must never give up our values. We must show that our open society can pass this test too. That the answer to violence is even more democracy. Even more humanity. But never naivety.”
This is the message that I would like to convey to my fellow citizens also in Finland.
Tänään on vaalipäivä. Olen ehdolla Uudellamaalla numerolla 61.On ollut huikeaa tehdä kampanjaa ja kiertää pitkin Uuttamaata. Olen tavanut valtavan määrän ihmisiä, joita en muuten tapaisi. Minulla on ollut apunani todella uuttera ja iloinen tukiryhmä, jolle olen superkiitollinen. Ei tätä muuten jaksaisikaan.Ihmisten kanssa ja ihmisiä varten. Sitä varten täällä ollaan. Neljä vuotta sitten eduskuntavaalien vaalipäivänä tunnelmat olivat yhtä jännittyneet. Mutta silloin emme tienneet, että vain vajaan vuoden kuluttua vaaleista tulisi pandemia ja sen jälkeen vielä Venäjän hyökkäys Ukrainaan. Sitten energiakriisi ja nopea hintojen nousu.Nytkään emme tiedä, mitä tulevaisuus pitää sisällään. Luotetaan silti huomiseen. Olen valmis kantamaan oman korteni kekoon, että me pärjäämme.Ja kyllähän me pärjäämme!#ehdokas61#kokoomus#uusimaa#eduskuntavaalit2023... See MoreSee Less
Minulla on eduskuntavaaleissa 8 erilaista teemaa, joihin voit tutustua tarkemmin nettisivuillani osoitteessa www.piakauma.fi Jokaisesta teemasta on myös video, ja tässä on teema numero 7 ja se on: "Varaudutaan kriiseihin ja varmistetaan turvallisempi arki" ... See MoreSee Less