Have you ever played with the idea of enacting a law? Would you like to add an extra day to your weekend? Close down the nuclear power plants? Or remove the alcohol tax? Since the first of April 2012 you have the possibility to try. But you will need 999 999 other supporters for your proposal.

The upcoming European Citizens’ Initiative will bring more participatory democracy in the European Union. Because of the new law everyday Europeans are able to contact the European Commission and take the initiative in the matters they would like to see changing.

“There is a certain need for the initiative. Currently the EU citizens can only affect on the parliamentary elections and it is not enough. More direct democracy means are needed”, states Matti Niemi, the President of JEF Finland, a European youth organization.

The EU institutions are often criticized of being remote from the citizens they represent. Many Europeans hardly know what the Parliament can do or recognize their own MEPs. When the citizens get more influence it is very likely that they get more interested in the EU as well.

Nowadays the only way to appeal the decision-makers is a petition. Any citizen can deliver one to the Parliament and wish that it has some consequences. Unlike the petition, the citizen’s initiative has to be reacted by the Commission. However, this is not a power that overwrites the original legislation process. The Commission will still have the final decision on whether to propose a law or not.

“I assume that the first initiatives are proposed by some traditional organizations, like Greenpeace and Amnesty. They are used to work in similar ways. Also the labor unions will probably take initiatives”, Niemi says.

In fact, the first initiative has already been proposed. Last December the environmental organization Greenpeace handed an initiative to the European Commission calling for a moratorium on GM crop production. Greenpeace collected one million names in only eight months. However, the initiative was rejected, since it was launched before the law was in force.

So how can I take my own initiative?

When proposing an initiative one faces strict guidelines. When you have contacted the Commission it will register the proposed initiative and make it public. The initiative can be refused only if it is manifestly abusive, frivolous, vexatious or contrary to EU values. Commission can’t register it either if the subject is outside the framework of Commission’s powers.

The initiator has twelve months to collect one million signatures. The signatures have to be collected from at least seven different countries of European Union. There are no restrictions on how to do it, whether it is in streets or on social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter.

One million signatures may sound more than one can shake a stick at. But on the other hand it’s only 0.2% of the E.U.’s total population. In the era when musicians like Lady Gaga and Kanye West have millions of followers on the social media sites, collecting the names should be a piece of cake.

“It is difficult to say how popular the initiative will be. But there has already been apparent interest towards it. I’m sure some of the parties will launch their initiative as soon as the first of April comes”, Niemi states.

The amount of signatures from each country is proportionate of the size of the country. For example 72, 000 signatures are needed from Germany and 9,750 from Finland.

The specialists advice to collect at least 1.25 million of signatures, because 20 percent of them could be invalidated by national authorities.

Finland will have its own initiative too

In addition to the European citizen initiative many countries like Austria, Italy and the Netherlands have an equivalent system on a national level. Soon this might be possible also in Finland.

The former Finnish Parliament has already accepted the legislative amendment. It includes regulations on citizen’s initiative on a state level. Because of being a constitutional change the new parliament must still approve the law.

If it’s accepted the citizen’s initiative law comes into operation on March 2012. So far, the initiative has only been possible to take at the municipal level.

“Finland does not have strong traditions in direct democracy. Even the advisory referendum has been rarely used. It has been organized only twice, regarding to the Prohibition of alcohol and joining the EU”, says Tuula Majuri, The Counselor of legislation who has taken part in preparing the law.

Due to the initiative any Finnish citizen can propose a new law or changes to an old one. The initiator has to collect 50 000 signatures on paper or online during six months. All in all the system has many similarities with the EU initiative.

“Finnish initiative is more difficult to get through than the European. There are 50 000 names demanded, against the 9 000 Finnish names in the European initiative”, Niemi says.

He thinks that the state should arrange for a website where people could visit and sign the initiative. Otherwise the system won’t work if the signature isn’t well organized.

Tuula Majuri in turn thinks that collecting 50 000 signatures is not difficult on the internet. For example the website adressit.com is an effective tool to collect supporters for a petition in short time.

Majuri is also able to see the good half of the Finnish initiative. “Compared to the European citizens’ initiative the Finnish one is a stronger tool. The initiative goes directly to the parliament, which is obliged to take it into consideration.”

Yet it is however difficult to predict which topics will inspire citizens to take an initiative. Majuri self supposes that they will be made on issues close to people, like the ones related to work and family. Also ethical and populist issues such as immigration could raise initiatives.

“Citizens’ initiative has probably some part to play in the Finnish democracy. It’s not completely useless. It has also a symbolic meaning, when the government offers the citizens this kind of opportunity for participation.”

The recent expansion of the Schengen Agreement area to new EU member states has improved the movement of people between countries. The EU is strengthening its external border control because of resent Middle East conflicts and illegal immigration waves. EU member states with an external border play a major role in the fight against borderless crime on land and sea and at airports. Finland and the Finnish Border Guard have played a central role in the development of the EU’s border security.

There are about 8 million illegal immigrants in the EU. Because of lack of an effective registration system it’s difficult to keep track of actual figures of people entering and leaving the EU. Key routes are Central Europe, the Balkans and the Canary Islands. Also in the Mediterranean countries the illegal immigrant situation is getting worse. The latest immigration battle is between Berlusconi’s Italy and France’s Sarkozy.

The Berlusconi government issued the 26 000 illegally arrived Tunisians temporary residence permits so they can travel freely inside the EU. Most French-speaking Tunisians are heading to France taking the immigration wave to North.  The refugees can now freely travel to the EU countries that joined the Schengen Agreement and this has upset France. The Member States should give up control of the borders to the free movement of EU citizens. But should the external borders of the Schengen area be better controlled to seal the “leaky” boarders?

The arrival of tens of thousands of North Africans has caused political fall-out across Europe with the EU preparing to reintroduce passport checks among Schengen-zone countries, after pressure from France and Italy. The cracks in the Schengen zone appeared to widen when Denmark decided to reinstate controls on its borders with Germany and Sweden to clamp down on drug and weapons smuggling. The solution is to improve the existing mechanism and not to allow member states to reintroduce border control by themselves without a consultation with the Commission and the Parliament.

• Quick facts:
• In 2010 104,049 detections of illegal border crossing at the sea and land external borders
• In 2009 figure was 104,599
• Important changes in 2011 or 2012, with the possible entry of Romania and Bulgaria into the Schengen area and Croatia’s possible accession to the EU.
• Spain was the Member State in which the highest number of cases of forged document use was reported.

Links about the Schengen Agreement and border control:

Border Control Code

Schengen Information System (SIS)

Newly-issued EU passports

External Borders Agency

By Piia Simola, Henni Laitinen and Jussi Soini (Group 3)

Want to buy a Greek island? Go ahead. There are 6000 islands in Greece, only 277 of which are populated. Selling these sun resorts could help the country cover its huge debt. But just in case you’re out of cash – who could buy such paradises for real?

Greece’s debt crisis was a long way coming, although the country did try to sugarcoat it. (Off the record, here is a less official, yet interesting angle.) It cut inflation and interest rates big time before joining the euro in 2001, appearing adequate for the currency. In the reality it had never had its deficit below the EU’s demand of 3 percent, not since 1999.

In 2009 Greece’s credit rating dropped and the EU expressed serious concern toward the country’s economic state. At this point Greece had to admit the disaster. A year later it launched an austerity package, freezing the public sector pay and commanding higher taxes. The same year, after much debate, the EU and IMF also stepped in with a multi-billion bailout package – 110, to be exact.

It is debatable whether or not this is enough: in 2012 the country’s debt will rise to 400 billion euros. There has been much speculation that the country should, in fact, start selling its assets. Greek islands have got to be worth something, right?

Well, yes they are: some 300 billion euros, to be exact.

Land has always been for sale

Selling state land isn´t quite a new idea. A certain Napoleon sold land from Northern America to USA in 1803 when France was in desperate need of cash to pay its debts.

Recently fashion mogul Giorgio Armani bought an island called Skorpios in Ionian Sea for $190 million, and rumors have that even The Beatles owned a Greek island in the 1960s for couple of months.

Nowadays  most of Greece’s islands are owned by private people,  valued between €3 million and €150 million. The government benefits from the sales through tax revenue and development. It is always involved when Greek property’s for sale, from authorizing a deal to regulating who can buy a property and for which amount of money. The complicated bureaucracy makes selling property actually quite difficult.

However, there are a few players in the market.

Companies are already selling Greek islands

Greek real estate company, Ktimatoemporiki Crete, is one of the companies selling islands for private buyers.

The company has 11 different isles in its selection. All of them are part of the Greek islands and most of them nearby Crete. The costs and sizes of the islands vary: smaller islands of 200 acres can be bought for four million euros. When the plot’s size increases to almost 1400 acres, the price goes up to 50 million euros.

Ktimatoemporiki Crete’s islands are sold for both private and commercial purposes. The islands attract buyers because of their beautiful coastlines and construction possibilities. You can build a dream summer house or start a new business.

In addition to entire islands, Ktimatoemporiki Crete also sells parts from already inhabited islands. This way houses can be built closer to public services. Selection of such sites is much bigger. Right now Ktimatoemporiki Crete has 69 plants for sale.

Toronto-based Private Islands Online is another real estate firm that sells Greek islands for private purposes. Their selection’s smallest isle, St. Athanasios, is 2.5 acres and costs 1.5 million euros. The 300 acres St. Thomas, on the other hand, is on sale for 15 million.

One might think that travel agencies could be interested in buying these holiday heavens. By owning entire islands the agencies could be sure that all of the tourists´ money drain and profit into their own cash register.

In Finland no one has yet come up with this idea.

“Our company has never considered the opportunity”, says Salla Salo, a press agent in Finnmatkat travel agency.

According to Salo, no other travel firm in Finland has ever bought an island abroad, either.

Greece must sell its property to cover bailout

How about other countries then? Could Finland land from the sunny south?

First, it must be said that Greece is not fond of this idea. The country’s prime minister, George Papandreou, considers such suggestion an insult.

Selling its assets, however, is a vital element in surviving such crisis.

“Finland sold its solid property during the 1990’s recession, as well”, says Pekka Morén, financial adviser from the Secretariat of International Affairs in Finland’s Ministry of Finance.

“However, Greece is not selling its islands. There are some state-owned companies that the country is considering selling, at least partially”, Morén continues.

These include Public Power Corporation, Hellenic Post Bank, water supply companies and ports, to name but a few.

“Selling these properties can be useful. They can be used as financial insurance.”

Morén says that selling state-owned assets is always done after much and thorough consideration, including defense and security matters.

“Finland is not buying islands from Greece, nor will we buy its state properties. It is in our interest that we get back our loan, 788 million euros so far, with interest. Greece must also sell its assets in order to decrease its debt.”

Greece's Prime Minister George Papandreou.

Quick tip: Set your foot in paradise!

Took a look in your wallet and realized you could spare a few euros for your own piece of crystal clear water and white sand? If that is the case, follow these instructions by Ktimatoemporiki, made for all of you who want to buy property from Greece.

1. Appoint a lawyer
2. Appoint a Public Notary, any property purchase agreement must be done in the presence of a public  notarity
3. Get a copy of the title deed and perform a title search at the Registry of Mortgages
4. Issue a tax registry number
5. Pay the transfer tax
6. Sign the contract
7. Effect transfer at the Registry of Mortgages
8. Notify the Land Registry for the transfer (if applicable)

Yearly costs for property in Greece are local municipal tax and yearly property tax, which is 0.3–0.8 % of the assessed value of the property.

While Schengen agreement has opened the internal borders of Europe to the free movement, there is a constantly growing pressure that targets the outer borders. Recent turmoil in northern Africa has made it even stronger. Certainly not all who get into Europe get the legal immigrant status. The highly problematic illegal immigration and employment seem to be on the rise.

According to the Commission of the European Union, there are eight million undocumented immigrants in the EU area. In Finland, the police had a special “theme week” of immigration control in April. The Central Bureau of Investigation, Border Guard and the State Provincial Office together checked over 1100 people. Their target was to prevent illegal immigration and its side effects, such as human trafficking. For example, more than a hundred Afghans were smuggled to Finland by a Latvian crime league.

“Only 21 people were found without valid documents, so that tells something about the scale we are talking about”, says Jouko Ikonen, detective chief inspector in the Central Bureau of Investigation. According to Ikonen, there is an estimation of a few hundred unregistered people in Finland, “maximum 3000”. About one third of all illegal immigration cases are detected in the capital region.

When you have nothing to lose, why not to go?

“One day they came again. I happened to be at home and went hiding under the bed. The soldiers took my mother to the court yard and they shot her there.” (Arlindo Antonio)

Reasons of leaving home and going to Europe are as many as there are migrants. Most undocumented immigrants who come to Europe and Finland have their origins in Africa or Asia. Anyway, huge differences in the standards of living are luring especially youngsters, who don’t have much job opportunities back home. Life may be so hard that it is worth taking a risk of sometimes a dangerous trip.

According to OECD, undocumented immigrant is a person who:

• has arrived in the country with false documents or without documents
• has arrived legally, but has overstayed his/her visa, and is unemployed
• has arrived illegally and is staying without permit, and is unemployed
• has arrived illegally and is unemployed, without right to legally reside, and is practicing criminal activity

Even though these people are officially unemployed, it has been estimated that 70% of them are engaged in illegal labor (Intereconomics 2004). According to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, there are several economic sectors that are heavily dependent on the exploitation of undeclared labor. Especially in agriculture, where there is a big demand on work power, lots of undocumented immigrants are hired.

Other sectors are construction, cleaning, the hotel and catering and tourism. For employers it may be hard to find any natives to do the low-status and low-paid work, which leaves no other choices than to use illegal work force. On the other hand, they are taking advantage from benefits that come along. Low costs, workers willing to do extra hours in harsh conditions and possibility to get rid of them easily are things that improve the business.

“I was cleaning the Amarillo nightclub seven days a week. The boss had promised six euro per hour and a couple of days off per month. There were no days off and the boss sometimes gave me fifty euro. Most of the wages was never paid.  What could I have done? He knew that I was totally dependent on him.” (West Chka)

“The human rights also belong to the undocumented migrants”, writes Anu-Tuija Lehto in Helsingin Sanomat. She is the lawyer of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions. She argues that illegal work has become a big problem in Europe, and there is a need for actions. Two years ago, European Parliament approved a directive on sanctions for the employers of undocumented workers. The United Nations human rights experts have strongly criticized this, saying that irregular immigrants are not criminals. The directive is also under a process in Finland.

It is estimated that in Finland there is a couple of hundred undocumented workers. Lehto says that paperless workers should have a right to stay in for a certain time, during which they could arrange work or study. Further, if a worker pays his taxes in Finland, should he also get the benefits like social security and health care?

Invisible aliens

Not having the legal status causes many other problems to irregular immigrants, including women and children. When you are practically invisible, you don’t have an access to social services of any kind, most notably to health care. The continual fear of being discovered and expelled is not making their physical or mental health any better.

“On the language class it was rather difficult to concentrate, since I didn’t know when the police would find me.” (Arlindo Antonio)

“It is completely inhumane that a group of people are excluded from all assistance. It is a doctor’s obligation to help people regardless of their status”, says Pekka Tuomola, the founder of a newly opened clinic, in Helsingin Sanomat. At the Global Clinic one can visit without a fear of expelling by authorities. Very basic health services are provided there for undocumented migrants in Helsinki. There have been about three to five patients weekly. The clinic is open once a week for a few hours at a time in a secret location.

Nearly 80 doctors, nurses, midwives and students run it voluntarily. In the future, they hope to offer services of specialists as well. The premises, equipment and medicines are provided by the Helsinki Deaconess Institute, where Tuomola works as a director of substance abuse and mental health services. He hopes that in the future the state would take responsibility of the clinic.

Lasse Lehtonen, Administrative Chief of HUS (Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa), tells that if there is a paperless immigrant in the need of urgent care in a serious case, no questions are asked. “What it comes to payment afterwards, in most cases the final bill is sent to tax payers. But the staff won’t contact the police. They have made the vow of silence.”

Still bubbling under on the other side of Europe

“I don’t know if anybody believes me back home, but I will tell about my experiences. I’m going to say it’s not worth coming here.” (West Chka)

Illegal immigration is a problem that touches all of us. While economy and businesses get advantage of it, there are also drawbacks. The loss of tax revenues and effects of black economy create serious harm. Not to mention the difficulties that irregular immigrants have to face in their daily life. The situation causes tensions between immigrants and locals. Illegal employment also affects the local workers’ ability to raise their salaries.

Beyond strengthening the border control and placing sanctions on employers there is also a third option: legalizing the status of paperless immigrants. For example, Spain took the difficult decision to legalize the situation of 700 000 undocumented immigrants in 2005. In Finland, the situation is still manageable. “We are talking about such a small amount of people. We can take care of the cases individually. Such a solution like in Spain is not current here”, says inspector Jouko Ikonen.

The quotes and the photos above from the book “Paperittomat” (Paperless) by Kaisa Viitanen and Katja Tähjä, published in 2010, by HS Kirjat. Arlindo Antonio is a former child soldier from Angola. West Chka fled from Nigeria due to religious related violence. Both are or were staying in Finland. Photos by Katja Tähjä.

Only 43 percent of Europeans voted during the last europarliamentary elections. The reason for poor voting activity is simple: many people feel that their vote does not really matter.

The newest Eurobarometer shows that 57 percent of European people consider that their personal interests and those of their country are not sufficiently taken into account in EU decision-making.

If this suspicion is ranked by country, Finland is in top 3 with 69 percent of people thinking that their national interests are not properly taken into consideration.

And here comes the funny thing: The European Parliament is supposed to represent the citizens. And yet only 48 percent of Europeans tend to trust the European Parliament, while 37 percent expressed distrust and 15 percent gave no opinion.

So why do many people feel that they have no say in EU-matters?

“That’s a bone of convention”, says Silja Lanas Cavada, the foreign correspondent of a Finnish weekly magazine Suomen Kuvalehti. She is placed in Brussels. One part of her job is to keep track about the work of European Parliament.

Lanas Cavada believes that to many people EU-work feels distant because of the way the Parliament works.

“The action in the EU is slow. All the processes are huge and it can take years before a directive is born, for example.”

One reason might also be the fact, that unlike its member countries, EU is run without opposition. Lanas Cavada believes that the domestic legislation is way more interesting because of the natural tension between the ruling and opposition parties.

It’s obvious that there are a lot of challenges in the communication between the Parliament and people – whether it’s media or the Parliament itself that we’re talking about.

So, what should be done? Here are five statements to bring the Parliament closer to people.

1. They don’t teach enough EU-matters in school

According to the European Commission survey by representative office ofFinland, majority of the young Finnish high school and vocational school students deal positively with the EU membership.

However, only 55,2 percent of the students consider that they get enough information about EU issues at school. Their EU knowledge could be better because the majority of them estimate that they know about EU only “to some extent”.

”Underestimating your personal knowledge is a part of Finnish mentality”, says EU publicity and media researcher Tuomo Mörä. “In some other countries they could say they know but in fact they don’t.”

Still, EU seems to stay distant to the young people and EU education given at school varies a lot in quality.

But who could resist a half-free study trip to Brussels?

How about the every-home-delivered EU magazine?

“It could work”, says Mörä. “But provided that people are already interested in EU issues.”

Mörä reminds that Finnish national identity is still stronger than their EU identity. To be interested in EU matters in the first place, nationals should feel that in the EU they make decions concerning their everyday life.

2. EU may communicate but it does not reach enough people.

If you think about companies, they report because it enhances their reputation. The challenge lies in selecting what to report on, how to organize the content and how to reach the right clients.

The whole EU faces the same challenge – it has over 500 million “clients”. It isn’t possible to always get through to every citizen. However, Silja Lans Cavada believes that the media could do better, when it comes to reporting about the EU.

When the elections are over, the new Parliament members start their work – and get lost in the huge, slow-working system.

“I believe that the decision-making would be more interesting to people if it were better reported – journalists should step away from the paper-tasting officialese and try to write their stories in a more people-friendly way”, Lanas Cavada says.

3. Maybe the MEP’s work isn’t advertised enough.

According to the Eurobarometer only 54 percent of the Finnish people trust the European Parliament. Still, they trust the Parliament more than the EU nationals on average.

There was an interesting article about Finlands effect on EU legislation. According to the article, Finnish parliamentarians don’t represent Finland or the Finnish government in the parliament but their voters and parties.

Therefore Finland should find some new modes of action if the country really wants to affect on the EU legislation.

At least media could do it’s job better and report about EU issues in an interesting way.

“It’s like a negative spiral. Media doesn’t report about EU decisions, because people feel that these issues don’t touch their lives. And since there’s no interesting EU news in the media, there’s no people reading them either.”

And yes, if not as much as 10 years ago, EU reporting still suffers from some gobbledygook. “They could always make it better”, says Mörä.

4. Media is sloppy when it comes to EU-reporting.

The research of Finnish Newspapers Union shows that 92 % on Finnish people read newspapers in 2010.

Silja Lanas Cavada believes that magazines and newspapers should write about EU-matter more frequently.

“Many papers cover EU-topics mostly during elections and then leave it in the background. Some newspapers have their own section covering Europeand EU, though. “

She also thinks that the quarrels and contradictions should be covered better.

“There are disagreements and quarrels in the parliamentary work as well. They are interesting to people.”

The answer could be newspaper that publish only EU-related articles (and use layman language), or if we don’t go that far should at least the biggest finnish newspapers give some of the pages for EU-section?

5. The Finnish contribution to EU influencing is lower than average.

The last EU elections were organized in 2009. Then 13 Finnish politicians were chosen to representFinlandin European Parliament.

On those elections the voting activity was only 40,3  percent of all those entitled to vote. That is nearly three percentage points lower than the average EU area’s voting activity.

Yet in 1996 more than a half of Finnish population (57,6 %) used their voting right. The reduction on voting activity sinceFinland’s EU membership’s beginning years is alarming.

Next EU parliament’s elections will take place in 2014. Is there ways to raise the voting percent then?

The first and the most important step to activate people is to get them to know for what they are voting for. If compared to last Finnish national Parliamentary elections in April 2011, the voting activity was 70,4 percent. The difference to EU elections is huge.

The domestic political coverage inFinland has always been intense before elections. The people are reminded that their voice will make a difference. Maybe the solution for EU election’s voting indolence could be found by cooperation of EU information center and Finnish journalists?

The main thing is to remember that people should have basic information about EU parliament before reading news about it.

“During my Brussels correspondent years it seems that the number of EU-reporting journalists has reduced”, Silja Lanas Cavada says. “It might be because readers are not as interested in EU-matters as others.”

The other – although highly illustrated – is the option of bringing EU’s decision making closer to people so they can really feel having influence.

Could a part of EU’s acts be made in the future by supranational referendum instead of parliamentarians?

Bringing EU closer to people is a project that doesn’t happen in one night.  In a video above you can find some accoplishments from last year – did you know about them?

Is leaving euro mere utopia?

Over a third, 35%, of the True Finns party –supporters feel that Finland should leave EU. This is transpired by a survey conducted in the beginning of 2011 by TNS Gallup for Helsingin Sanomat newspaper.

18 per cent of the answerers thought that Finland should stay in the EU, but give up euro as a currency.

All parties don’t feel the same away: only eleven per cent of the Coalition party wants to abandon euro, and among the Green party the percentage is 16.

A finnish social politics professor J.P. Roos told Helsingin Sanomat in April, that in his opinion Finland should leave euro immediately. According to him, euro is weakening Finlands competitiveness and potential in the markets.

However, professor Roos and the supporters of True Finns stand far from the rest of the nation, as a vast majority of all Finns clearly wants Finland to stay in the EU and also preserve euro. 66 per cent of all Finns are pro-EU. Only a little more than a tenth of the country wants to restore the old currency, finnish mark.

It is more common for older people to want to leave euro, as younger generations seem to be much more eager in keeping it, as well as in staying in the EU.

Mari Kiviniemi of the Centre Party, who was also Prime Minister at the time, said after hearing the results of the survey that the idea of Finland leaving euro doesn’t seem likely. She also felt that the consequences of Finland joining euro have been mostly positive.

– It has stabilized our economy, she commented in Helsingin Sanomat.

The survey was done by telephone interviews between 18th of January and 28th of January in 2011.

But what would happen if Finland actually abandoned euro – and is it even possible? Let’s turn back time to the point when euro first came to be.

Ten years of euros
The first stage of euro was born as early as 1979, when the European Currency Unit was founded. The real possibility for a common currency didn’t evolve until the beginning of 1990. That’s when EMU, European Monetary Union first started to form.

In 1992 the basic ground rules of EMU were decided by the signing of the Maastricht treaty. In 1994 the real preparation for the common currency started, and the name euro was given for it.

Euro has a long history.

After many complicated interphases, the euro was finally implemented 1st of January 1999, but only as an account currency. At that time there were eleven countries in it: the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Austria, Luxembourg, Portugal, France, Germany and Finland. Greece wasn’t accepted to join the group until 2001.

The euro bills and coins took years of time to manufacture, because they had to replace the massive amount of money in eleven countries. The actual, concrete euro bills and coins didn’t arrive to countries until a year later, 1st of January 2002.

No procedure in place
We asked two Finnish experts if it would be possible for Finland to leave euro and how could it be done.

Paavo Okko, a professor from the University of Turku says that the idea of leaving EU or euro was left open; it did not belong to the basic philosophy of European integration.

“There is no laid down procedure to leave EU or Eurozone, not for Finland or any other country.  If some country however decided to leave Euro, it would have to be handled somehow, but no one is to say how the rest of the EU-countries would then react to that country”, he says.

Simo Pinomaa, an expert from confederation of Finnish industries, agrees with Okko.

“Technically it would need an unanimous decision from all EU-countries and Finland, because euro is an agreement between countries. But Finland is a sovereign country so it can do as it pleases. ”

If Finland left EU, it could lead to other countries leaving it as well. After that Finland might consider establishing a common currency with countries that have similar economies, such as Sweden and Germany.

According to Okko, leaving EU wouldn’t be as easy as it may seem. If Finland did it, we would have to press new bills and figure out, what course would be used to convert euros back to finnish marks, if that was the chosen tactique. One of the most crucial questions would be, in which currency should the leaving country pay its debt.

Euro may not hold forever
Okko doesn’t see any real reason for Finland to leave EU. He also sees little good in the possibility of other countries leaving it.

“I think that when someone leaves it, it will be during a very bad crisis, worse than current one. A country like Finland could possibly leave EU without any impossible problems, but then again, a country like Finland has no reason to do it. Greece, however, has a reason to leave EU, but by doing so it would probably suffer very great damages in the process”, says Okko.

Pinomaa feels the same way, but thinks it is very likely that euro-system will collapse at some point. History has taught, that all money-unions have broken up at some point. It is only a question of time.

“It might be soon or as late as after fifty years. But even then it would be unlikely for Finland to go back to having its own currency. It would more probably establish a new currency with a few countries like itself, and the southern countries that are in trouble now, would have their own.”

The recent election victory of the True Finns had the rest of the Europe worried:

Developing countries are threatened by different kinds of environmental changes. IPCC estimates that weakening in living conditions can cause more than 50 million environmental refugees escaping their home region by the year 2020. Where do those people go? Are European Union countries potential to place these refugees? How should EU be prepared to such high number of environmental refugees?

According to researchers an environmental migrant is defined as following:

• People who are purportedly forced to migrate from their home region due to sudden or long-term changes to their local environment. These changes include more droughts, desertification, sea level rise, and disruption of seasonal weather patterns such as monsoons.

Though the definition is quite simple it is not that easy to define who is escaping for environmental reasons in practice. The problem of refugees can be caused in so many ways. Usually a reason for someone escaping from his or her home country is always something environmentally related. Desertification can cause lack of agricultural possibilities, which leads to lack of food creating a group of people escaping from the region. For example some of the restlessness in Northern Africa has risen from environmental issues. In Tunis some conflicts stem from the lack of food and people escaping the conflicts can be counted as environmental refugees.

Already without the environmental migrants, the refugee situation in the world is severe. According to the United Nations refugee organization UNHCR there were 43 million refugees in year 2009. The majority of refugees don’t leave their home country: only a third is forced to escape abroad.

Eight out of ten refugees live in developing countries. Three countries with the biggest amount of them are Pakistan, Iran and Syria. 14 per cent of the world’s refugees live in Europe, where the most are located in Germany, United Kingdom and France.

The EU:s point of view

EU directive defines requirements for a refugee:

• Asylum is a form of protection given by a State on its territory based on the principle of non-refoulement and internationally or nationally recognized refugee rights. It is granted to a person who is unable to seek protection in his/her country of citizenship and/or residence in particular for fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.

There is no such thing as an environmental refugee in the directive. According to a report Future floods of refugees made by Norwegian Refugee Council in year 2008 so called economic migrants do not have a very strong position in international law. This migration is often linked to socioeconomic conditions.

Some national legislations have anyhow considered also environmental refugees. For example in Finnish legislation for foreign affairs there is a mention about humanitarian protection. Basically it means that Finland is prepared to take environmental refugees to the country in case there would happen some environmental crisis nearby. “But the law has never been used this far or no refugee has invoked the humanitarian protection when seeking asylum”, says Sanna Sutter, a consulting official from Ministry of the Interior in Finland.

The frightening outlook

Since environmental refugees are not given the refugee status, official records do not include environmental refugees. Any official number for them does not exist, but the organization Red Cross has estimated that in year 2001 there were more than 25 million environmental refugees. Compared to total amount of refugees (43 million) it is a lot. According to Intergovernmental Panel for climate change the number of environmental refugees can even be as high as 750 millions. The number depends on the way the refugees are counted.

The cap between those numbers can be explained. A “normal” refugee escapes his or her home country for personal reasons. He or she or a little minority group is personally persecuted and is in a need to leave the country. But when an environmental crisis hits it can have influence to more than a thousand persons at the same time and they all have to leave their country. That makes the number of environmental refugees so much bigger.

Environmental refugees are not only them who are escaping sudden environmental crisis. Also those whose living condition weaken in a long run are environmental refugees. “The flood of climate refugees moves very slowly. The reasons for people moving out of their living areas are happening in so wide range of time. People are starting to flee from the areas little by little”, says Outi Perähuhta, planner of International Programme of The Finnish Refugee Council.

Whose is the responsibility?

There is a moral dilemma, about who should take responsibility of environmental refugees. Some say it is the industrialized Western countries, because they can be accused for causing the climate change. Some say it is nobody’s fault, because nature and climate are not controllable.

The problem is that the European Union does not know the word environmental refugee. For EU, environmental refugees don’t exist.

The future is impossible to predict, but the European Union does not have the capacity to settle millions of refugees coming on short notice.

Until now the most refugees have been settled by other developing countries. The most of the world’s refugees live in Asia, Middle East and Africa. Only fourteen per cent live in Europe. Is this going to change along with the climate change shaking the third world? Europe might be the future worlds safe harbour.

The European Union has not publicly noted any intention to extend the definition of refugee to apply to people fleeing for environmental reasons. At present the EU is not prepared for the possible massive flood of environmental refugees.

Has EU already done enough?

In the authorities point of view, the European Union does not have to take actions for improving the conditions of environmental refugees.

“We in the European Union already have regulations for helping these people”, says Esko Repo from the Finnish Immigration Service.

Outi Perähuhta remarks that the European Union already operates for climate refugees’ benefit with the European development policy and the Climate Action established in February 2010. If the EU manages to diminish the carbon dioxide emissions, it may be able to diminish the number of climate refugees.

Also working in the field of development and aid may help also environmental refugees. For example Finnish Refugee Council has projects that aim to help people of developing countries to decrease their own emissions.

Listen and watch Abdul’s story about how it feels to be an environmental refugee.

Parliament is a nation in miniature, but do we REALLY want that? In a society there are people who have good output, but nothing inside the hat. And, on the other hand, people with a lot of wisdom and horrible output. Which one you would like to be the one pushing the vote button in the European Parliament?

Good output, lots of wisdom?

Democracy isn’t perfect. According to Esko Valtaoja, Finnish writer, thinker and professor of astronomy, the problem of democracy is equality.

“It raises opinions above knowledge… More and more complicated world doesn’t need populism and gut-feelings, but ever more knowledge instead of opinions.” (Turun Sanomat 19.4.2011, in Finnish)

He is worried that people give their votes to “good guys and chicks” and populism and gut feeling is guiding instead of wisdom.

EU decision making is very detailed and complicated. The only requirements for a MEP are:
he/she has to

• be a citizen of the Union;
• be resident in the EU country in which s/he proposes to vote or to stand as a candidate;
• satisfy the same conditions as a national of that EU country who wishes to vote or to stand as a candidate (the principle of equality between national and non-national voters).

MEPs salary: 12 000 – 14 000

Should we test the knowledge of the Members of the European Parliament before we allow them to make decisions that affect the prices of sending SMS to our friends, how much money must every state member put on the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and can you clone animals in the EU?

Every taxpayer in 27 member states pays the salary of the 736 MEPs. And the number of MEPs may rise in the year 2014 elections according to BBC. MEP makes 7 956 euros as a salary, with daily expense allowance and travelling benefits the money earned in a month is 12 000–14 000 euros.

The budget of the European Parliament is 1,686 billion euros in 2011.

European Union institutions use competition and examinations in process called EU Concours, when selecting staff. Should the MEPs take such tests as well?

How well would you do? Try here!

Helena Petäistö, a recognized Finnish EU-journalist has seen many kinds of MEPs during her career: good, experienced and hard-working, and those who don’t work nearly at all. She sees that there are more “qualified” MEPs than in the previous years, due to the growing importance of the European Parliament.

“I don’t support the idea of qualification tests. It is against democracy. I see that the media plays a vital role in this. It is media’s task to spread knowledge for the voters about EU’s significance. Maybe then people might stop voting celebrities and screwballs to the Parliament.”

When asking Finnish EU-parliamentarians, if there should be a test, the solid answer is no.

According to law-experts the idea of an “entrance test” for the MEPs is impossible. “Being a parliamentarian isn’t a profession, it is a position of trust and therefore there can’t be any requirements for the candidates. It would be against democracy”, states Tuula Majuri, Counselor of legislation from the Finnish Ministry of Justice.

Tuomo Martikainen, a professor of political science is also against the idea of testing the candidates. “The idea is quite clever, but dead before it was born. It would be against the spirit of democracy if there was some kind of limitations for who can be a candidate and who can’t. If the people want to elect an idiot to the parliament it is their choice and their right.”

The turnout has dropped in every election.

Since the first elections in 1979, the turnout has been falling throughout the European Union. In the first elections 1979 election turnout was 63 %. The turnout has dropped in every election. The last time only 43 % of the persons entitled to vote in the European Parliament election voted.

Tests to make the selection easier?

Could the media’s and public interest in EU elections be increased by testes which were published and used as a selection tool like the election machines on the web?
What if the test wouldn’t limit their chances to become a member of the parliament?

The suggestion gets just a little bit more support.
“There’s a point in that”, says Martikainen and continues with a better idea: “More realistic and equitable solution would be that the parliamentarians’ ability to do their job would be tested all the time – also between the elections.”
Martikainen suggests that some official institute, for example Eurostat would administrate a register about parliamentarians’ working habits.

“There are a few parliamentarians who know that they don’t need to do anything between the elections, because nobody follows their working. If there was an institution which would update their actions to the register all the time, they would have to concentrate on the promises they have given to the voters and do their job well.”

Democracy isn’t perfect, but it’s all we have.

here is the secon paragraph

The Finnish natural gas market is relatively small and isolated, with a pipeline connection to Russia. The demand for natural gas is expected to increase in Finland in the future and the current gas supply volume via the existing transmission pipeline from Russian Karelia will become inadequate. Finland is now investigating possibilities to link gas networks with Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia to ensure security of supply through connection to the rest of the European Union.

Studies commissioned by the Finnish natural gas company Gasum and the gas companies of the Baltic Countries, on the feasibility of a gas pipeline running across the Gulf of Finland, have been completed.
     
According to the assessment, there are no technical obstacles to building a gas pipeline from Inkoo in Finland to Paldiski in Estonia. The cost would be between EUR 100-120 million.

 Natural gas markets in Finland

 Natural gas satisfies around 11 per cent of Finland’s total energy requirement. Natural gas is imported to Finland from Russian western Siberia without any supply interruptions over 35 years.

” The use of natural gas will  likely increase in the future, but the use of fossil energy as a whole will decrease. Or at least it should decrease”, says Satu Hassi, Member of th European Parliament for the Green League.

Currently, there is only one importer and wholesale supplier ,Gasum, which also owns and operates the transmission network. Retail supply of gas is undertaken by about 30 companies, supplying gas to designated distribution areas.

“The security of Finnish gas supply will improve if Finland had also another source to import gas”, says Mauri Valtonen, Senior Inspector from Finlands  Ministry of Employment and the Economy

In contrast to the rest of Europe, major institutional consumers are the dominant natural gas users in Finland. In 2009, 66 percent of the total Finnish natural gas consumption went to combined heat and power generation in municipal and industrial power plants.

“One solution  to improve the self-sufficiency in natural gas use in whole European Union area is to improve the energy effiency of buildings, because major part of natural gas use is currently   directed to heating”, says Satu Hassi  

Balticconnector

Balticconnector is a planned natural gas pipeline between Finland and Estonia. It will link the Finnish, Estonian and Latvian natural gas grids. The Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan, launched by the EU Commission in 2008, examines the possibilities to construct a natural gas pipeline between Finland and Estonia, and the possibility to construct a shared liquefied natural gas- terminal (LNG) for Finland and the Baltic countries. The final report of Balticconnector study project will be completed in spring 2011.

“Balticconnector will enable to trade gas to much larger region than currently.  The coherent market-area will support the possibility to construct a shared LNG-terminal. Another option is pipeline to Norway which is more expensive”, says Mauri Valtonen.

“The final investment decision is made by the gas companies, it is difficult to predict will the project be realized and what is going to be the schedule “, Valtonen adds.

If Finland and the Baltic Countries were to decide together to build a terminal for liquefied natural gas, imports would be possible by ship, from the Middle East or Algeria, for instance. Setting up an LNG terminal requires cooperation, because such an installation would be expensive, and would require a large market of users.

“If the Balticconnector will be realized it is a major factor to improve Finlands gas markets and it will also give us more market potential to import LNG. The connection to Latvian natural gas grids will also balance the import of gas”, says Hannu Kauppinen, the Director of Finnish Gas Association.