https://www.hbl.fi/artikel/739f6234-7013-5204-a9fb-eaaa402fbffb

"egeringen Orpo has received criticism (HBL 19.9) for the cuts that affect children and families with children in different ways. The criticism comes from authorities, researchers and organizations within the third sector, who are involved in the groups affected by the cuts. And of course also from the opposition parties.

Based on the government program that was approved in mid-June, it was clear that there are several different kinds of cuts that can affect children and their families in particular. In addition to saving on public expenditure, the purpose is also that it should always be more profitable to work than to live on various social benefits. The aim is in many ways good - but people's everyday life and reality is so multifaceted that the government's way of speeding up employment can in the long run lead to bigger problems. In the long run, they can lead to large costs, both human and financial.

The children's ombudsman Elina Pekkarinen wrote a letter to the government based on the government program in June of this year, where she pointed out that there is much positive in the government program with regard to the children in Finland. Such as investments in early childhood education and primary school, or wanting to renew the Child Protection Act and improve young people's mental health. But Pekkarinen is deeply concerned about the cuts affecting basic protection for vulnerable families. Concretely, it is, for example, about abolishing the child allowance in the labor market support, in the basic day - and the sickness allowance. At the same time, the income support and the housing allowance are to be reduced.

Several bills are already out for consultation. This applies, among other things, to deteriorations in housing support and in unemployment benefits. The time to give opinions on a draft law should be at least 6 weeks, but in several cases it is now only 2 weeks. The explanation is that it is about so-called budget laws, which therefore refer to the budget proposal for next year. The Riksdag has a deadline for budget laws and therefore time is short. It is still extremely problematic. In several statements, it is pointed out that no impact assessments have been made, for example, in terms of how families with children are affected, nor to what extent they are affected by several cuts. Those who give statements also find it difficult to make impact assessments themselves in such a short time.

Those who, for various reasons, lift several supports can get really bad. Housing subsidies are common in the capital region. A family with one parent and two children, where the parent works part-time and earns 1,500 euros per month can receive both adjusted unemployment benefit and housing allowance. Now both supports are therefore at risk of falling, among other things so that the child allowance disappears. In this example case, the support drops by 300 euros. It is a large sum. In Helsinki, many low-income people live in the city's rental housing. They may be hit threefold because the rents will be increased due to the fact that Heka, the city's rental housing company, has received increased interest costs. Today, 57,000 single breadwinners receive housing benefit. In Helsinki alone, there are approximately 9,600 single breadwinners with housing benefit. The fact is that there are many people who work but still need housing benefit. When it comes to families with children defined as poor, about half of the parents work.

Approximately 11 percent of Finland's children live in relative poverty. Children's Ombudsman Elina Pekkarinen points out in her letter to the government that several studies have shown that poverty affects children's development negatively. In Finland, two extensive studies have been conducted for children born in 1987 and 1997. They have shown that when the income of families with children decreases noticeably, the parents' stress increases. Their psychological well-being, their relationship with each other and their parenting are affected. Poverty is often inherited, and here there is a connection to mental problems, crime and the need for child protection. In another context, Pekkarinen has seen the traces of the depression of the 90s in today's learning problems at school. Today's children have parents who were children during the Depression.

It is good if more people work, but the problem is that not everyone can work. There are health problems, there are regions and industries where jobs are scarce, and there are many unemployed people who do not have the skills that the labor market requires today. And among families with children, there is poverty even though the parents work - because not everyone gets a full-time job and in some industries the pay is very low. Finland has a children's strategy and since 2019 a central goal has been to reduce child poverty. Now the government seems to pull everyone who does not work full-time over the same comb - regardless of whether it is about families with children or not. We have to make sure our children are well. It assumes that the parents are well. It is the only right thing from a human point of view, but also considering our future economy and future labor market."