August 31, 2021, will likely be a date that goes down in history. The news media that day were filled with the story of the USA and the “West” leaving Afghanistan.

But a lot happens in a day. Another event that didn’t quite get the same attention was the verification of the population numbers in the upcoming welfare areas to determine the size of each welfare area’s council.

Each welfare area’s council decides its own size, but according to the law on welfare areas, at least 59 members must be elected to the council in the smallest welfare areas and at least 89 council members in the largest. For the first time, the election will be carried out according to these established minimums.

How low can voter turnout drop before legitimacy is perceived as non-existent, and what do we do then?

According to the approved proposal for the social and health care reform, elections will be held on January 23, 2022, in all welfare areas except Helsinki. This means it’s time to go to the polls in about 140 days.

A question being asked is whether there will be any major circus around the election? Will there be an eagerness to exercise one’s right to vote? It looks a bit threatening.

The municipal election this summer had the lowest voter turnout in 70 years. Those who cast their vote were 55.1 percent of eligible voters. How low can voter turnout drop before legitimacy is perceived as non-existent, and what do we do then?

Low voter turnout naturally also affects the result. Exactly how is determined by who votes and who abstains.

Electoral systems are rarely the same upon closer inspection.

At the end of the summer, when the final touches were being put on negotiations between parties about trust positions in municipalities, France went to regional elections. France is divided into 18 regions, 15 of which are in Europe. The regions handle, among other things, education, public transport, and economic policy.

(The ironic could well state that it seems the approximate number of regions a country needs is relatively constant regardless of tasks and population size.)

The system for elections in France, one of the cradles of democracy, differs somewhat from what we have in Finland. Electoral systems are rarely the same upon closer inspection. What should be perceived as a “democratic” way to appoint decision-makers can be debated for a long time, even among countries generally perceived as liberal democracies.

In the regional elections in France, there are two rounds held a week apart. From the first round, parties that have received at least 10 percent support move on. Parties that fall below this threshold but have received more than 5 percent can ally with others to stand.

Of France’s population of about 66 million, approximately 46 million were eligible to vote, and just over 15 million voted. Voter turnout was 34.3 percent in the second round, compared to 33.3 percent in the first. Of the votes cast, about 600,000 were blank or rejected. To create stability in the regional assemblies, the party that received the most votes is given a bonus of a quarter of the mandates.

Now, voter turnout depends on many factors. One of them is naturally how well-known or “close” the body one is to decide on is. On that point, the challenge is great for our new welfare areas.

There will be quite a concentration of influence to a few people.

Certainly, almost everyone has had their nose swabbed or been vaccinated in these pandemic times, so parts of the social and health care operations should be familiar to large parts of us voters. But from the swab in the nose or the needle in the arm, it is quite a leap to decide who is suitable to sit on a new welfare area’s council. Candidate nomination will be important.

Candidates are also not a simple problem. Well-known politicians probably attract more people to exercise their right to vote. But this means that we will largely have every member of parliament sitting on a welfare area council, in addition to many usually taking a seat on their home municipality’s council.

There will be quite a concentration of influence to a few people, who should also adopt slightly different perspectives on the policy they pursue: the municipality’s, the area’s, or the nation’s. The different interests do not necessarily always align.

I would very much like to be an optimist.

The temptation to field candidates who already hold multiple positions will likely be great for all parties. The focus on a few “top candidates” has increased due to media coverage of various imaginary “mayoral elections” in the big cities.

Many well-known national politicians also come from Helsinki, where there is no election this time. An election campaign in the “whole country,” which does not concern the capital, is what must engage voters.

I would very much like to be an optimist, as the question of who sits on the new welfare area councils is very important. But unfortunately, it doesn’t look promising.

This article by Georg Henrik Wrede was previously published in Swedish on Kommuntorget.