So many rumors circulate about Prohibition in Finland! The reality is much more prosaic: there is no Prohibition here, drink as much as you like, if your salary allows. Prohibition in Finland is replaced by high taxes on alcohol and, as a result, excessively high prices for alcoholic beverages. But the European Union is forcing Finns to give up both prices and taxes. Then, as pessimists believe, it's not long before they take to drink.
There is a well-known joke in Finland: friends Pekka and Jussi decided to drop by Pekka's home to have another pint of beer before bed, after the last bar in town had closed. Then Jussi urgently needed to use the toilet, and the host explained that he should open the first door on the left down the hallway. Of course, somewhat tipsy Jussi confuses the door and opens the first one on the right. As a result, he finds himself in his friend's bedroom, where Pekka's wife is making love to some unknown young man. Shocked, Jussi hastily returns to the kitchen and says, "Sorry, Pekka, I don't even know how to tell you, but someone is pleasuring your wife in the bedroom!" - "Quiet! What if they hear that we're here, and I've only had two bottles of beer to drink."
This joke greatly amuses the local people. As a rule, the object of jokes is what, under ordinary circumstances, causes people a feeling of discomfort. An Italian, most likely, would not find the situation described above funny at all. He would probably be much more struck by the idea of marital infidelity. And an Englishman, one would suppose, could not help but be disturbed by the intrusion of an outsider into private life, i.e., the violation of the unshakable principle "my home is my castle." The deeply rooted ambiguous relationship with alcohol in Finnish culture, based on the principle of love-hate, pride-shame, has turned alcohol into a true obsession.
In the early days after joining the European Union, Finns were convinced that, as if by the wave of a magic wand, they would immediately become very European in everything - including their drinking culture. Many truly believed in the possibility that people would finally begin to treat alcoholic beverages more calmly, without the former urge to "get drunk," naively assuming that a "civilized" custom would come into use, at most having a glass of wine with lunch and a cocktail after work. In reality, it turned out differently: the cocktail became not a replacement for old habits, but an addition to them. The "civilized" lunchtime dose was simply added to the assortment, expanding the fully preserved range of everything previously consumed. And this is a problem. It will not disappear; most likely, it will only get worse.
Last year, Finns drank a record amount of alcohol in recent times: 9.3 liters of pure alcohol per person. The number of active consumers who, according to existing criteria, are considered to be balancing on the brink of alcoholism or are at serious risk of falling into complete dependence on alcohol, ranges widely from 250,000 to 400,000 (the total population of Finland is about 5 million). Every year, on average, 3,200 people die from alcohol-related causes. According to some estimates, up to a third of all patients sent to hospitals for treatment end up there due to health problems directly or indirectly related to excessive alcohol consumption. And the diseases that develop on this basis cause the state to pay 3,500 disability benefits annually.
The craving for drink in 2000 cost Finnish society, by the most general estimates, 500-600 million euros in direct costs. This includes social benefits and treatment costs, as well as crimes committed by drunk people and the material damage they caused. If indirect losses are also added, the total amount would reach five billion euros.
Traditionally, Finns use the simplest tool for preventing and combating alcohol vandalism - high prices and the unavailability of alcohol (sales only in specialized stores, limited trading hours, etc.). But now everything is changing. The validity of the exceptional conditions that Finland negotiated for itself in the European Union when discussing the degree of freedom of alcohol trade expires on January 1, 2004. And given the possible accession of Estonia to the EU next spring, the game will have to be played by completely different rules.
Once the restrictions are fully lifted, any adult resident of the country will have the right to bring in per trip 10 liters of spirits, 90 liters of wine, 20 liters of fortified wine, and 110 liters of beer. In total, that amounts to 230 liters of alcoholic beverages at each border crossing. In August, sociologists from the Gallup service, based on a public opinion poll, found that a tenth of the Finnish population harbors the intention to immediately take a ferry to Tallinn next spring to stock up on cheap alcohol. If the average Finn decides to make such a purchase, he will save a lot on it. At the moment, the above-described full load costs about 1,845 euros in Finland. The same thing in a Tallinn shopping center of the Citymarket rank would cost 986 euros. Even adding the cost of the round trip and the time spent on the journey to the total, it is not hard to understand what should be preferred.
Politicians, by the way, are also able to correctly determine the result of such a mathematical operation as two times two. For its part, the Finnish government is taking radical measures to try to stem the flow of cheap alcohol from Estonia. A sharp reduction in excise taxes within the country has been announced. Their reduction for high-alcohol beverages was 44%, for fortified wines - 40%, for beer - 32%, for simple wines - 10%. This decision takes effect from the beginning of next year.
One of the key factors is the dependence of employment in Finland on the volume of production and sale of alcohol. Breweries and distilleries plus specialized retail stores, bars, as well as farms associated with alcohol production, transport companies and wholesalers provide 30-40 thousand jobs in the country. And they exert such pressure on the current not-too-stable coalition government that it is difficult to resist. The ancient tradition of bread and circuses shows well which path the country's leadership should take to gain wide popularity and instill in the masses love for itself if it becomes, to put it mildly, unstable. Paradoxically, one of the arguments for considering the adopted decision rational and logical is the reputation of the current Prime Minister of Finland, Matti Vanhanen. He is a total teetotaler, does not drink alcohol at all, and for a long time headed a society for the promotion of a healthy lifestyle, on whose initiative various courses were held where people were taught to enjoy a "restrained and moderate" life. If people like Vanhanen have come to the conclusion that cheap alcohol is a good thing, then perhaps it is right?
Too late to complain
Research by the Finnish Institute of Health gives reason to assert that the tax cut will lead to an increase in domestic sales and, accordingly, an increase in alcohol consumption by 16%. If imports also double in parallel, then the total consumption of pure alcohol per capita in the next couple of years will most likely jump to 12.2 liters. In proportion to current indicators, one can expect at least an additional thousand deaths per year, another 8,700 violent attacks involving drunk people, 7,800 new diseases due to alcohol addiction, and 2,800 people will become completely unfit for their work.
Along with the decree on lowering alcohol taxes, the Finnish government also published a list of measures designed to reduce the theoretically predicted damage. There is practically nothing new in the list, nor anything specific. The only innovation, perhaps, can be considered the requirement for anyone who brings in more alcohol than they are "able to consume for personal purposes" to report this to the authorities. In other words, in practice you will have to explain to a customs officer at the Finnish border for what purpose your van is loaded to the brim with bottles of vodka. Health officials assure that Finland has the right to introduce such a rule unilaterally. Lawyers, for their part, warn that Brussels will put an end to this after the first complaint.
Finnish Minister Liisa Hyssälä, who deals with matters of public services, intends to obtain new concessions from the European Commission. The matter is clearly hopeless. One of Finland's MEPs, Eija-Riitta Korhola, emphasizes that the main established principle of the European Union is as follows: a state that is a member of the EU cannot take any separate action with the aim of protecting public morality, public order, general security, or the health of the nation. In response to the formal request made by the deputy in April, Korhola received a reply from Frits Bolkestein, the Commission member responsible for the internal market of the member states. Bolkestein, in particular, reminded that Finland was given the necessary time to bring its alcohol policy into line with the required standards, so now it is too late to complain.
A similar question addressed to the Commissioner for Health and Consumer Affairs, David Byrne, turned out to be even less productive. Byrne noted that the European Union fully supports programs whose task is to educate people, informing them about the health consequences of alcohol abuse, so he advises Finland to switch to awareness-raising activities.
This year, it was precisely the processes under Byrne that led to the identification of a number of serious gaps in the EU's fundamental premises, in particular a completely absurd attitude towards everything that threatens human health. The EU was among the very first to sign the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This global agreement aims to reduce the scale of the global tobacco epidemic. The Convention recognizes the importance of tax measures to "deter" smokers, and calls on all signatories to raise taxes and prices on tobacco products. Duty-free sales are considered undesirable, so it is recommended to prohibit or restrict duty-free cigarette trade. Parties to the Convention are required to introduce a comprehensive ban on advertising, promotion and sponsorship of everything related to tobacco within five years of ratifying the treaty.
The above-mentioned measures, as well as many others noted in the agreement, contradict the principles of complete free trade. It is precisely these principles that Brussels defends, putting forward demands for unrestricted, free access to alcoholic beverages. At the very time when the EU proudly boasts of its strict anti-tobacco policy, Brussels officials diligently pay one billion in subsidies every year to tobacco growers. And don't even try to find any logic in this.
Troubles ahead
There is nothing improbable in the assumption that alcohol consumption in Finland will jump to 14-15 liters per person annually. As employees of the Finnish state Center for Research and Development of Health and Social Welfare warn, such a trend will lead to profound changes in society. Both the public and private service sectors, small and large firms, manufacturing enterprises - all would suffer significantly if the existing tradition of getting thoroughly drunk on Fridays and Saturdays spreads to Sunday, and even further, to the rest of the week. Low prices and easy availability of alcoholic beverages are causing particular concern after an analysis of behavioral trends among young people. In 1999 in neighboring Estonia, according to an official study, 89% of all Estonian schoolchildren had experience with alcohol. About 20% admitted that they first tried alcohol at age 11, and most teenagers managed to get drunk "to the point of passing out" for the first time at 13-15 years old. Does the EU utopia of a single European market imply such a picture as the future of all Northern Europe?
In the free Western world, people are expected to resign themselves, even if they dislike it, to the stern warnings printed on cigarette packets or speed limit signs on roads. At the same time, it is almost impossible to launch an open critical discussion about the harm of alcohol without the initiator being immediately branded a moral hypocrite. But the topic is indeed complex and important. When well-trained specialists talk about it, they have no choice but to constantly point out alarming "red" signals.
Psychologist Risto Niemi, director of the Myllyhoitoyhdistys project (a public health association whose goal is to combat the immoderate consumption of various harmful substances in Finland, be they alcohol, drugs, or cigarettes), is convinced that simplifying the conditions for bringing vodka from abroad and lowering prices in local stores will cause huge alcohol problems for many people who currently fall into the category of "moderate drinkers". "Such a policy is, quite obviously, mistaken," Niemi believes. "And there is no doubt about it. It will disrupt the distinction in society between heavy drinkers and those who drink only from time to time. Real alcoholics have already found themselves in a position where the meaning of life and control over it are practically lost. And they cannot get access to cheap vodka from Estonia. Especially since for a person who has sunk into alcoholism, the price of the drink no longer matters.
Finns traditionally have a rather complicated relationship with alcohol. People here believe that one should drink until trouble begins. But trouble is already waiting. Those who are used to a little drinking on weekends and holidays will begin to slide down - toward ever heavier drinking. Thus, we are dealing with a very special manifestation of everyday culture, which differs from the mythical picture of well-mannered Europeans savoring fine wine in moderate doses. But such is reality. Sooner or later the chosen course will have to be corrected, and it should be developed for Finns by Finns themselves."