Over 27,000 and growing!

Åsub have just produced a report which shows the population on Åland exceeding 27,000 for the first time. The increase is mostly due to immigration and Mariehamn, fast approaching 11,000 citizens, is responsible for over 2/3 (128 people) of the population growth on Åland in the first half of this year. And, nearly 40% of the net immigration was from countries outside Scandinavia.

Among the many attractive features of Åland which are contributing to this growth, one stands out clearly for me. It was certainly the strongest factor in our decision to set up home here. That is, there can’t be many better places on the planet for family life than Åland.

If Åland wants to continue the upward trend in its population statistics, it could do worse than to market itself on its family friendliness. To take but one example, our daughter’s nursery is truely awesome. Great staff, amazing facilities, lots of activities and, consequently no doubt, a great atmosphere. When we were still thinking about moving back to Hull, we went to check out the University’s nursery. I almost wept it was so poor in comparison. The bare concrete yard that served as an outside play-area would’ve shamed the U.S. penitentiary system, AND the nursery fees were more than twice as much.

Early Campaigning and Mariehamn’s Buses

I spent several hours stood outside a garden centre in my voting district in town today. Mariehamn is divided into four districts and we’re in the Strandnäs district. It was the social democrats’ strongest district in all of Åland at the previous municipal elections, so we were well placed! The weather was nice, I had pleasant company and the people who we met were almost all friendly. The vast majority of those I asked answered our questionaire. I was a little suprised by just how strong support was for the toll-free town bus. Something I am also strongly in favour of.

There was an article in Nya Åland a couple of days ago about them. They have been wholely funded through the tax system since 2000. The article noted that a recent investigation found that there was general satisfaction with the bus system in town by those who use it, but that were also a number of non-users who were very discontented that it was funded through general taxation. It also noted that the number of passenger journeys had more than trebled from 80,000-90,000 to 300,000 per year since the buses became toll-free.

I’m sure Mariehamn’s social democrats will head into the election calling for the system to be maintained. I’ve noticed some signs, however, that the liberal’s support for toll-free buses in town may be wavering. Given that their support was needed to introduce it, I wonder if they’ll have a policy on it for the municipal elections, or whether it will be quiet on that front?

To means-test, or not to means-test: that is the question.

The social democrats have come in for some criticism -short response here – over the new law regulating the fees charged by ÅHS (Åland’s health authority). There was a ceiling of 450 euros a year, above which you didn’t have to pay for a number of ÅHS’ services. This has been significantly reduced to 300 euros. The ceiling for children has likewise been reduced from 225 euros to 125 euros, and a new ceiling has been introduced for those over 65.

All well and good, but in the same reform, the safety net for those on low incomes was removed. That means there will be some people who are a little worse off than they were before the reform- those on low incomes who had the 225 euro ceiling, but who are not entitled to the lower 125 euro ceiling.

The general point at issue here is how far the benefits of the welfare state should be means-tested. One of the biggest problems with means-tested benefits is that they may not reach the people they are intended to reach. This was the case with the lower ceiling entitlement for ÅHS services; many of those entitled to the lower ceiling were discouraged from applying for it and those that did apply had the burden of proof on their shoulders. Means-testing also generates more bureaucracy, which usually increases the costs of administering the system significantly. Once again, this was the case with ÅHS. That’s not to say that means-testing is never appropriate, but when it concerns a public service that everyone uses regardless of income, it is far better to have a universal system of low/no charges. In addition to ensuring that nobody slips through the net, you generate greater support for the services from all groups in society.