No moron, you don’t know how to listen to the Finnish people who placed your party into power.
He must have had his fingers in his ears while participating in the opening of the Finnish parliament, as the president delivered an excellent speech on the subject.
Migration is a serious problem. Europe, Finland, the western way of thinking and our values have all been challenged by it.
This is a stark transformation; just a few years ago we were exporting our values and regarded them as unquestionable, now we are having to consider whether even we ourselves can preserve them.
The flow of immigration into Europe and Finland is largely a case of migration rather than a flight from immediate danger. All estimates predict that the flow of people will increase this year. This is challenging the ability of western democracies to help and also challenging the very structures underlying the idea of Europe.
In the resulting chaos, the situation facing the migrants can only worsen. It is known that refugees are being exploited. We have just heard about the 10,000 missing minors in Europe. Human traffickers, with huge illicit business operations, are exploiting and cashing in on the situation, often risking the lives of those on the move. There is also a risk that refugees will be used as pawns in cynical power politics.
We hear a great deal of talk about how we must close our borders, or at least limit the number of entrants and, most of all, immediately return wrongdoers. Many people agree and wonder why we have not done so already. There is an explanation for this.
I am now approaching the key issue. International agreements, EU directives and national laws have been enacted and thought through in an admirable, right-minded manner – in order to protect all those who are in danger.
However, in practice this means that anyone who knows how to pronounce the word “asylum” can enter Europe and Finland; in essence, use of the word grants a kind of subjective right to cross the border. Without any good grounds whatsoever, an arrival is entitled to an evaluation lasting years and can then, if not qualifying for asylum, avoid enforcement of the subsequent decision and remain where he or she arrived under false pretences.
And so we come to the dilemma that is so deeply rooted in our values.
Europe cannot withstand uncontrolled migration for much longer. Our values will give way if our capacity to cope is exceeded. It so happens that good intentions are creating a bad situation for everyone.
It is alleged that most, if not almost all, measures that might be taken to control the process are in breach of international rights and agreements. The result is that we cannot do what many people consider necessary.
It has also been suggested that the International Convention on Refugees should be amended. This would be a slow process, unlikely to solve what is an acute problem.
Sipilä: Finland is not able to discuss the refugee issue
The Prime Minister wants to resolve the Syrian refugee problem through quotas.
Prime Minister, Juha Sipilä, (center party.) attended the Syria conference in London He prefers the solution to the refugee problem on the EU-level through use of refugee quotas.
– EU-level problem-solving is according to UN practice, of refugee quotas, which will be systematically take people into Europe, estimates Sipilä.
Sipilä calls for practical solutions to the refugee issue. Sipilä hopes that Finland would be taking fixed-term quota of more refugees.
According to Sipilä, the big picture on Syria is that the country should have a cease-fire. Then, the peace process should start.
– Finland could play a big role in the peace process, says Sipilä.
According to Sipilä Finland does not know how to discuss refugee issues. Dealing with the subject in his view, one should have a warm heart and a cool head. Sipilä calls for a balancing act between two extremes.
NOTE: One key point of disagreement with the Finnish president in his speech is this. In times of extreme situations, where member nations in the EU, as well as the political entity of the EU itself, are arbitrarily suspending laws out of political expediency, it’s buffoonish to insist on adhering to the letter of the law as if none of this is happening. We are not bound by agreements if the other signees insist on dissolving (even temporarily) it according to their own self interests. The lives of Finns is your (and parliament’s) first duty, protection of the civil society.