Searching for power on the Arkadia Hill

A glimpse in the evening news of a parliamentary plenary session shows the MPs gossiping with each other, over what look like untouched piles of paper. It easily creates an image of an idle bunch of politicians with no say – apart from the occasional sarcastic comment shouted at a speaker, followed by a bit of a giggle. “To a degree the plenary sessions are the place for a bit of a drama,” admits Minna Sirnö (Left Alliance). “The opportunity to influence things takes place elsewhere.”

It is a common belief that the parliament is a mere rubber stamp, holding no power in the face of the government’s decisions and set agendas. But members of parliament claim this to be an illusion. They strongly believe that there is power vested in the individual members of parliament; but it is exercised through different forums and tools, such as the parliamentary committees, bills, networks, and via the media.

Bargaining the details
The work in the parliamentary committees is considered by the MPs as a significant arena to practice power. “Most of the time influence is hard to detect as it is such an intangible matter, but in committees the work is concrete and the results are easier to see,” says Susanna Huovinen (Social Democratic Party).

The committees do play a big part in the Finnish parliamentary system and the distribution of posts always raises wide interest. There are sixteen committees in the parliament, covering all the key areas of politics. For example, the great committee (suuri valiokunta) advices the government on EU matters, the future committee (tulevaisuusvaliokunta) predictably specializes in gathering information on future matters, and the work of the environmental committee (ympäristövaliokunta) evolves around the construction of the next nuclear power plant.

The committees follow the government’s agenda, but also listen to specialists and professionals in the topic at hand. Often the original government initiatives change during the committee process. The government has an overall vision but the power of bargaining over the details of an issue and ensuring the lawfulness of any changes, fall into the hands of individual members of parliament.

Parliamentary bills
During the last term of parliament a total of 665 bills were put forward by MPs. This parliament has lasted less than two months but already 22 new bills have been proposed. Lauri Oinonen (Centre Party) is responsible for five of them and he promises there is more to come. “I believe that there is great power potential in the bills in the long run,” he says. The bills raise awareness about issues by provoking discussion and media attention, and may ultimately even make their way to the government’s agenda in the future.

The life cycle of a bill, for example a proposal to reduce the limit for driving under the influence of alcohol from 0.5 % to zero, starts from a committee. After the committee has dealt with the bill, the discussion continues in a plenary session, followed by vote in a later session. In between, the bill may also find its way to a great committee. If the bill require changes to the constitution, it lives on to the next parliamentary term.

In this way a bill can be also be seen as a power tool to keep in touch with other committees. A tiny percentage of bills proposed ever becomes law, but as Oinonen says “a bill is like a seed that grows into a general discussion, creating political pressure to deal with issues. The zero tolerance for drunk driving is worth at least the discussion of general values in the country”.

Knowledge is power
Like the chain reaction created by a parliamentary bill, knowledge is an abstract and immeasurable form of power. For Paula Sihto (Centre Party), a new member of parliament, the availability and overwhelming quantity of excellent information came as a surprise. “One has to be able to use it effectively for it to be of use rather than a nuisance,” she says. Old hand Erkki Pulliainen (Greens), with two decades of parliamentary work behind him, confirms the dual nature in the power of information.

“You need have information and knowledge, as well as perspective. A good memory and the ability to pick out the essential are the keys to holding power,” Pulliainen claims. It is also possible that power can also leak to the state secretaries, and civil servants can also hold the keys to information, he adds.

Who has the voice also has power. Talented speakers have always done well and media wars are becoming more and more effective. The media serves as the most natural and effective channel of information between the politicians and the voters, who should be shown what the politicians are doing with their mandate.

Attracting media attention may not only be more complicated for a less known MP than for those holding more powerful seats, but it may also backfire. The media is always more interested in scandals and mistakes than in the smaller achievements that come and go. Nevertheless, the media is not solely to be blame, says Huovinen. To get one’s voice heard not only requires activeness from an MP but also the ability to transcend bureaucratic manners of speech, she says. The nature of power is also verbal.

Local media carefully follow their own representatives, says Sihto, who is the first ever female MP from Ilmajoki, and knows what she is talking about. Being under the close scrutiny of the people back home is motivating and the attention does not give room to forget the promises made, she says.

Weaving networks
Susanna Huovinen, now in her second parliamentary term and this time in the opposition, has noticed that the access to information is more limited than before when she was in government. Her new position does not mean being offside but is a gateway to information and contacts elsewhere, she says. As the minister of transport and communication in the previous government, she no doubt had more power of influence, but less time to create the contacts she finds essential as an MP – the civil society outside the ‘granite castle’.

“The information flow between organisations and interest groups, parties and different parliamentary issue-groups, is also a valuable source of influence,” says Sirnö. “Exchanging ideas creates new ideas and arenas for lobbying. “

Power flows in different forms in the corridors of the house of parliament. Opinions on where and how it really accumulates differ from one MP to another, but there is one thing they all seem to agree upon: power lies tightly in the ability to cooperate and compromise. That is the fundamental nature of democracy.

Pulliainen, who has written a book about the power of an MP, has an anecdote about an education minister years back, who confessed that the amount of power brought by his position frightened him. The average MP probably does not face this problem with the same intensity. But as Pulliainen puts it: “The world is filled with potential power – it simply depends on the people and their means who gets hold of it.”