Skip to content
Media
Valtioneuvoston kanslia frontpage

European decision making must be founded on a strong value base
Prime Minister Juha Sipilä at the discussion on European Values and Future of the EU

Government Communications Department
Publication date 21.11.2017 14.44 | Published in English on 22.11.2017 at 10.02
Speech

Speech held 21 November 2017 (Check against delivery)

The theme of this event is very important and one that is very close to my heart. I have emphasised the importance of values as the base for decision making in all of the work communities I have participated in. Values are tested in practical actions, whether in business, a political party, a national government or the European Union.

First, there is reason to remember the history of European values, the base upon which we have later built even the European Union. From the perspective of history it can be said that the EU is built on the legacy of Hellenistic civilisation, Roman jurisprudence and Christianity. In the early part of the last century, consequent to the bloody experiences of the First and Second World Wars, the pursuit of peace became the primary goal. However, only the Second World War and the horrors of the Holocaust gave rise to the determination to strive for lasting peace and cooperation.

In May 1950, the Schuman Declaration presented by Foreign Minister Robert Schuman of France became the starting point for building a peaceful Europe. The key European leaders saw that common values, in particular, would be the uniting factor of a completely different, better Europe. Starting with the Treaty of Paris, signed the following year, a new kind of Europe has been built, in unison and with determination.

One central concept raised by Schuman and other EU founding fathers was solidarity. The economy and politics are not advanced only by free competition but also by jointly perceived responsibility for seeing that the opposing side fares reasonably well, too.

It is good to remember this history when we consider the present-day European Union, its value base and decision making. The European value base includes more than the valuations or transient ideals popular today. It consists of the principles guiding the Union’s actions. The values refer to the fundamental ideas that are thought to be permanently so important that it is justified for the entire community to strive resolutely to achieve them.

The Treaty of Lisbon defines the fundamental rights of the European Union to be respect for human dignity and human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law. These values unite the Member States, nor can a single country be a member of the Union without recognising these values. Originally, the European Union was specifically a community of values. It is good to bear this in mind as the foundation of all decision making even today. How, then, are the EU’s values reflected concretely in decision making?

Negotiations with new candidate countries are a good example of how the value base influences Member States in practice. In accordance with the Copenhagen Criteria, a candidate country must respect these fundamental values of the Union so that it can be granted membership of this community of values.

Respect for human rights and human dignity should, in my view, be seen in all political decision making. At this point, I want to bring up for example the issue of immigration. For most of us, the heart certainly says that those who flee war, who suffer and need help, must be helped together. We must be able, however, to maintain social peace and fairness while doing so. We must also see through misuse.

Human rights and human dignity are indivisible, and they must be respected unequivocally in all decision making. We cannot close our eyes to cruel human smuggling or to the thousands who have perished while trying to reach Europe. Nor can we close our eyes to violence occurring within the EU, or to disparagement or to bullying in the classroom. All cruelty of this sort must be condemned unequivocally already within the framework of the common value base. It must be possible, through all decision making, to recognise the person and his or her rights and needs, and each person’s indivisible human dignity.

Is European democracy being realised? Much is said about European decision making, that it should be possible to bring it closer to citizens. I agree with this, people must be able to take part in European decision making better than before. Suspicions and criticism often stem from being deprived, and I believe that this is in part the EU’s problem. Strong democracy and democratic principles guarantee that we have a stable society where discussion takes places. I want to promote this.

Striving for equality, too, should be seen in all European decision making. Firstly, we must promote gender equality in every way. In the EU, we are at a better level than on many other continents but here, too, there is room for improvement. For this reason, the EU’s social dimension is an important and pivotal entity where measures to promote equality, for example in working life, need to be given more attention.

At this point, I also want to bring up the principle of regional equality. In EU policy this has always been one of the guiding principles. Throughout the Union’s history, effort has been made to reduce regional differences by means of a strong cohesion policy. Areas that have lagged behind development are supported through the EU budget. This has produced results; the GDP of many areas has risen and development differences have shrunk.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Defining values is always a subjective process that can also end up in conflict situations. Recently there has been serious discussion, for instance with regard to Poland and Hungary, about how the EU can intervene if a Member State no longer complies with jointly agreed values. The possibility of suspending a Member State’s right to vote in the common decision-making organ of the Member States, the Council, is recorded in Article 7 of the Treaty of Lisbon. However, the decision requires unanimity of all the other Member States.

Thus, in the European Union we have to consider the meaning of one of our basic values, the principle of the rule of law. We are accustomed to understanding it so that public servants who thoroughly know the laws and their content, the judicial system, are responsible for the administration of justice. Their judgments are based on the law and the tradition of well-considered interpretation of the law, not on prevailing political opinion.

We are badly adrift if the law is no longer respected as one of the pivotal basic factors of society. The principle of the rule of law means in practical situations, above all, a free and independent judicial system.

Our common European challenge now seems to be, how can we control the realisation of the rule of law as our common value? Is it seen everywhere as a fundamental value which no other value can steamroll? In my view, this should be the case. The principle of the rule of law should be a strong shared base for all of the EU Member States.

Another conflict situation is linked with the immigration crisis. To what extent can we expect those arriving in Europe to have the same value base, when one of the EU’s fundamental values is equality and, on the other hand, freedom of opinion and speech? These are the issues that every EU decision maker has to weigh these days. At the same time, we must also ponder about ourselves and the values guiding our own attitudes and the ways in which we implement them. How do such values as helping people in distress and defending each person’s human dignity challenge and even obligate us?

Values do not let us off easily. They invite us to continuous consideration and weighing of the meaning of matters. Our challenge is finding equilibrium with regard to the requirements of differing and sometimes even opposing values.

Now that Islam with its numerous interpretations and the values it represents has a stronger presence throughout Europe, and also in our society, it may be tempting to begin strongly to oppose the arrival of values foreign to us. However, we must first ask ourselves what our own, lasting European values are, according to which we strive to steer ourselves.

The presence of Islam challenges us more broadly to develop our own religious literacy. Priest Mari Leppänen, of Lieto, has given a good description of how different religions and viewpoints have risen to become a visible part of our reality. From this angle, the importance of teaching religion, for instance, is emphasised. Lack of information leads to misuse of religions both inside and outside them. There is also an increasingly greater need for dialogue between different beliefs and for inter-religious peace work.

Social peace is enhanced by the visibility of religions, convictions and cultural backgrounds, by secure coexistence, and by dialogue and cooperation. Solutions should not be sought by dispelling religions or their customs from public space. In the worst case, religiousness that has been driven underground gives rise to radicalisation. Only what is publicly visible can also be a topic of public discussion and an object of critical assessment. This discussion and assessment can also help to find common values across religious boundaries.

Perhaps being European may now be an issue that we can consider our topical value: that we emphasise the European way to perceive society. At its core are human dignity, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms. It is precisely our shared, historic, European values that have guided us in creating our present-day welfare society.

Emphasising our European character does not prevent us from loving our homeland and valuing everything that has been built over a hundred years.