Reader’s opinion|The government campaigns, but at the same time dismantles the structures of equality work.
The government the anti-racism campaign has caused debate and mixed feelings. Not all government parties have committed to the campaign, and many have experienced it as a show-like forced performance. The government speaks against the goals of the campaign with its other actions.
The government will use six million euros of government funds for the campaign. It is justified in itself to spend so much money to eradicate racism. However, in these times of saving, one should carefully evaluate where the money is allocated.
The campaign at the beginning, large companies and labor market organizations have been conspicuously highlighted as participants in the campaign. Big companies are not the worst breeding grounds for Finnish racism. On the contrary, they generally recognize the benefits of diversity for business, and they are able to pay for the diversity training they need themselves.
Does it make sense to use government funds for campaigning and education for those who need it least and can pay for it themselves?
“
It is necessary to carefully evaluate where the money is allocated.
Simultaneously the government dismantles permanent structures for the long-term promotion of equality and equality in the name of savings. One example is the abolition of the equality information center of the Institute of Health and Welfare (THL). The center was a small unit that gathered and disseminated research data on multi-based equality to a wide field of actors throughout Finland. It also did important development work, and it had accumulated valuable expertise. No grounds or impact assessments have been provided for the termination decision.
The public administration and work associations still have statutory obligations to promote equality and equality among personnel. The public administration also has a promotion obligation in all actual activities based on the pass principle, including the preparation of legislation.
We suspect that closing the equality information center will not create any savings, because it will require research data to be collected separately in different administrations to assess the effects of gender and equality. Transparency is part of the operating principles of public administration. We ask that the reasons and impact assessments for the termination of the Equality Information Center be made public.
The government is ending equality planning in kindergartens. In tight times, money is used for campaigning and taken away from long-term practical work.
Government also significantly cuts state subsidies for non-governmental organizations. For example, immigrant organizations have done cost-effective work with small resources to promote integration. Non-governmental organizations have a lot of experience and expertise in anti-racism work in its various forms. The government’s campaign does not make up for paralyzing the work of organizations.
Government has already prepared its budget proposal for next year. Could it be possible, however, to assess the funding emphasis of the anti-racism campaign and direct a reasonable part of the campaign budget to non-governmental organizations doing anti-racism work to replace the cut state subsidies?
Marja-Leena Haataja
equality and equality consultant, Kajaani
Sinikka Mustakallio
equality and equality consultant, Helsinki
Inger Tanhua
PhD researcher, Hanken Svenska handelshögskolan
The reader’s opinions are speeches written by HS readers, which are selected and delivered by the HS editors. You can leave an opinion piece or familiarize yourself with the principles of the pieces at www.hs.fi/kiryotamielipidekeisuis/.
#Readers #Opinion #money #antiracism #campaign #wisely
