[Check against delivery]

Students of Corporate Social Responsibility, Members of expert panel,

First of all, I want to express my satisfaction that corruption and bribery has been chosen as central theme of this panel discussion and that it attracts such a big audience of our future entrepreneurs and decision makers.

Finland has a good reputation as one of the least corrupted countries. Responsible and fair business behavior can be recognized as a distinctive feature of Finnish corporate culture and business environment. This can be used as a competitive advantage in both attracting investments to Finland and in finding investment opportunities for our companies abroad. But in order to use low corruption level as an advantage, we have to work consciously to ensure that we have even more efficient measures in place to fight against corruption and to progress from the current low level to zero corruption.

Corruption and bribery are among the key issues when we talk about Corporate Social Responsibility. For quite long time corruption was considered a problem concerning mainly the public sector. The most commonly known definition of the concept of corruption used by the World Bank, ”abuse of public office for private gain” has nowadays been quite widely replaced by Transparency International´s definition: ”abuse of entrusted power for private gain”. This is one sign of the change in thinking that corruption is not a monopoly of the public sector, but involves private sector managers and employees as well.

When people think about corruption they often relate it to bribery. There are many other forms of corruption as well, such as conflicts of interest, embezzlement, influence peddling, favoritism, and so on. Bribery, however, is probably the most concrete form.  It is the act of offering someone money, services or other valuables, in order to persuade him or her to do something in return. There are always at least two sides involved. Bribery is corruption by definition and widely criminalized through international and national laws.

What consequences does corruption have to the society and economy?

Corruption can be also categorized according to the level in which it happens. The most common categories used are political or grand corruption, administrative corruption and so-called petty or every day corruption, which means for example fines to be paid directly to police officer or payments for services that should be free. In Finland, I dare to say, we are free of petty corruption. Our corruption cases, that are luckily few, relate more to administrative or grand corruption. In small countries, with limited markets, private cartels are typical forms of corruption. And this has been a problem in Finland too. In many developing countries, on the other side, petty corruption is part of everyday life and causes important human rights violations especially for the poor people. It is hard, and not even relevant, to define which of these types of corruption has the most serious social or economic consequences. For example grand corruption can divert great sums of funds from public use to private pockets, while petty corruption is likely to affect most the poor people.

In principle, corruption distorts the decision-making processes and functioning of free markets. This can happen in different levels, from bribery related to procurement to favoritism in design of policies. Bribery in public procurement processes reduces the benefits of competitive market and can lead to increased costs paid for products or services and thus diverts public funds to private gain. United Nations Global Compact has estimated that corruption adds worldwide 25 % to the cost of public procurement. This is impossible to measure exactly, but in any case we are dealing with significant numbers. On the other side, corruption in procurement can lead to sub-standard products or constructions that can risk the public health, environmental or personal security. There are many examples in the world of violations of building regulations and faulty inspections of constructions that have resulted in disasters: fires, building collapses, and so on.

Equally in the health sector – which is in our focus today – there are many examples of corruption in procurement leading to over-payments for drugs, sub-quality or counterfeit drugs, or sub-standard equipment purchased. Conflict of interest on the part of doctors – the issue that will be discussed in more detail here – has been reported a common worldwide problem: doctors may have inappropriate links to pharmaceutical firms or own their own pharmacies or clinics. Also education and accreditation of medical professionals can be compromised by a combination of bribes, political considerations and conflicts of interest. This is a more common problem in developing countries where education system is not so systematically regularized but we have seen at least one case of fake doctor also in Finland. In the developing world a common human rights issue is that the poor don´t have access to even basic services because they can´t afford to pay the illegal facilitation payments asked by the doctors.

According to BDO LLP, a British accountancy and business advocacy firm, globally almost 400 billion euros are lost annually to fraud and error in healthcare industry, representing around 7 % of global health expenditure. Recently there has been positive development and losses have been reduced at global level but the numbers are very concerning and represent significant human rights violations.

In addition to these one-time, however disastrous effects, continuing and extending corrupt behavior can lead to structural or systemic corruption that has longer-term consequences of institutional and cultural character that are very hard to remedy. It creates an institutional culture of corruption and decreases the trust that citizens have of the public institutions. This kind of systemic corruption can lead to wider undermining of basic human rights, as inequality increases, services are withheld, and sometimes people die. The poor, and disproportionately poor women who use more the basic services, suffer most of these effects. Systemic corruption and favoring of certain groups is also one of the root causes for many conflicts.

And of course, corruption damages the investment climate. Corruption has often been cited as number one cause for poor business environment and investment climate. The reason is that corruption creates too many uncertainties for companies and investors. It puts an extra price tag, often difficult to pre-estimate, for companies´ trade and investments and distorts normal market processes at the cost of honest entrepreneurs. The investing companies can be more confident of the validity of the contracts and of the value of their investments, when there are clear rules and regulations in place and their implementation is systematic and transparent. Rule of Law is therefore essential for a healthy investment climate, and corruption hinders the functioning of it.

So, when we talk about the morality of bribery, we should always bear in mind also these wider consequences of corruption to the society. Even individual corrupt behavior can have disastrous effects. Individual behavior also contributes to structural or systemic practices and, eventually, erodes public morality in general and weakens democracy and trust.

Of a bit different note, I would also like to remind that the awareness of corruption in the world has increased quite a lot in the last two or three decades. Corruption is in news almost every day.  Since the beginning of the current financial crisis we have heard frequently about new corruption stories even in European countries. Every now and then there are new revelations about contacts between politicians or public sector institutions with organized crime, for example in Latin America, undermining the public trust in authorities and the Security System.

Corruption has been pointed as one of the root causes of conflicts, for example in Ukraine. Finland is of course not free of corruption either, as we have seen this year in news around drug police or construction business. The point is that corruption stories, especially in cases of political or grand corruption, are always in the public interest. This means that both public and private sector organisations need to pay serious attention also to the reputation risks involved in bribery and corruption – of course in addition to the fact that corruption is morally wrong and a crime.

Finland has enjoyed for a long time of reputation of being among the least corrupt countries in the world. In the latest Transparency International´s Corruption Perception Index, which is based on views of analysts, business people and anti-corruption experts, Finland is in the 3rd place. This is only one exercise trying to measure this secretive and complex phenomenon that is impossible to measure exactly. However it provides a broad picture about the seriousness of corruption in a given country. In Finland only a few suspected bribery offences are reported to the authorities each year. On the other hand, Finland has received criticism because many of the reported cases have not led to sanctions.

There are many factors behind the low level of corruption in Finland and these range from the high levels of social confidence and respect for legal system to transparency and publicity of the performance of official duties, independent and efficient judicial system, and to social factors, such as high level of education, free and active press, high standard of living and relatively small differences in income.

But maintaining our low levels of corruption, and lowering them further, in increasingly globalized world, requires some actions as well. We can´t just rely that our good position in global indices is enough. Different Corporate social responsibility initiatives are a good example of how anti-corruption efforts, together with human rights and environmental and other social impacts, are receiving increasing attention in private sector. There are important international conventions that Finland is party to. The United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which has now 173 States Parties, is a worldwide commitment, including measures for private sector as well. OECD´s anti-bribery convention requires the signatory countries to implement efficient measures to prevent bribery of foreign public officials in international business relations.

In Finland these measures have been included in the Penal Code, in its Chapter 30, which addresses bribery in business. In Finland a person who offers or accepts a bribe can be sentenced to fine or imprisonment.  Also a legal person may be criminally liable and sentenced to corporate fine. The scope of corporate liability covers also bribery offences committed abroad and targeted at public officials of other countries. For example, the situations when a Finnish company directly or through an intermediary bribes a foreign public official. A Finnish court can deal with bribery offences committed abroad by a Finnish citizen or company, even if the act is not criminalized in the country in question.

Corruption is fought against through development cooperation as well. In the development cooperation partner countries, as well as globally, Finland promotes strengthening of transparent, accountable and participatory institutions and processes and the role of civil society. In the field of Corporate Social Responsibility Finland supports the United Nations Global Compact which aims to strengthen the UN and private sector partnerships for social responsibility. The ten principles of the Global Compact include respect for Human Rights, environmental impacts and work against corruption.

We have seen that corporate responsibility has already been mainstreamed in big companies, and the phenomenon is rapidly growing in emerging economies and in development agenda, providing healthy peer pressure. Companies cannot afford any more to risk their businesses involving in corrupt practices. Investments in transparency, accountability and social responsibility are needed, and they will come with greater confidence among consumers paying soon for themselves as business advantage. This gives some good basis for expectations that even if the challenges in the globalized world are more complex, corruption will be even more actively tackled than before.

Your Excellencies, Dear Presidents, Dear Colleague, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is my great pleasure to be here in Ankara today, as we celebrate a milestone in the bilateral relations of our countries. This year marks the 90th anniversary of the signing of the Turkish-Finnish Friendship agreement, and it has been commemorated by activities in both countries throughout the year. In Finland we have been able to experience Turkish culture from all angles, from the Turkish cuisine week to art exhibitions. In April many spectators visited the Turkish frigate TCG Gaziantep, which docked in Helsinki for three days.

In many ways this seminar is the highlight of the anniversary year. I am extremely happy to see you all here celebrating our friendship and our common past, and exploring our common interests for the future. Those future interests are not only bilateral in nature – we can also act together for a more prosperous Europe.

PART 1: Friendship

90 years ago Finland and Turkey were both young republics, founded in the midst or in the aftermath of the First World War. In 1924 much of Europe was still in turmoil, and both countries faced similar challenges. In this historical context, the two countries were quick to find each other, and to recognize each other’s independence. Turkey was the 12th country to recognize Finland, and Finland among the first ones to recognize Turkey in 1924.

Our warm friendship is deeply rooted in the first years of independence of our countries. Finland and Turkey also share the experience of being located in the borderlands of Europe, where different cultures have always interacted and influenced one another. This exchange has undeniably served us well, enriching us both in material and cultural terms.

On the other hand, our geographic positions, Finland in the northeast and Turkey in the southeast, have not always made life easy for either of us. Lately we have both seen indications of how our neighbourhoods can again become more challenging.  Yet, both of our countries have proven time and again how it is possible to prosper in these environments. Finland has grown from a scarcely resourced and remote agrarian country to a successful member of the European Union. Turkey, at the same time, has developed into a dynamic G20 power.

People-to-people contacts are one important aspect of Finnish-Turkish relations. Today about 250 000 Finns visit Turkey every year, which makes Turkey one of the top three travelling destinations of Finnish citizens. A high number of Finns also live permanently in Turkey.  Your country offers us exceptional warmth and hospitality.

There are also other historical connections related to our peoples that must be mentioned. The integration of the Tatar community into Finnish society over the past century has been an exceptional success story. The appreciation for the positive contribution of Tatars to Finnish-Turkish relations has often been expressed also by the Turkish leaders visiting Finland.

A willingness to understand each other, based on mutual respect, has been an integral part of the relationship between Finland and Turkey since the early days, creating an excellent foundation for close cooperation in politics, diplomacy and business.

PART 2: A stable and prosperous Europe as a common goal

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Only a few days over 25 years ago, I happened to be on a work trip in Seoul South Korea and was watching the live coverage of the Berlin wall coming down on television in my hotel room. It was a time for great hopes and expectations. Many things have changed for the better, Europe has come a long way, even if all our hopes have not been met.

Since then the European Union has become a community of 28 member states. Today the EU can be described perhaps as the most successful peace project in world history putting an end to the long and disastrous history of wars between its founding member states. The EU has advanced peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe for over 60 years. These achievements truly make the EU worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize accorded to it in 2012.

The EU enlargement was designed to heal the Cold War division of Europe. The continued enlargement of the Union has expanded the zone of peace and stability on our continent. Therefore, it is important that the EU also in the future keeps its doors open to those countries in Europe that are willing to join and fulfill all the membership criteria of the Union. And of course, the EU also has to keep its commitments in this regard.

The EU is at its core a community of shared values. The Union’s foundational values are reflected in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the Rule of Law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These are values that we cannot compromise. These are values that we should never take for granted. Upholding them even in the EU requires our constant attention and work.

As a result, European integration has delivered peace, stability and well-being to our citizens on an unforeseen scale in the continent’s history. The social cohesion and daily individual encounters across borders that are barely visible within the Union, bear the highest importance for maintaining the peace in Europe. In the end, it is the people who make peace possible.

It is a paradox of the international debate that these values are sometimes seen as a threat to some states. In fact, the opposite is true. I want to underline that strengthening the rule of law, fundamental human rights and other European values – instead of European I would actually call them universal values – have been proved to have a real positive impact on the lives of citizens.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The world today is facing global challenges of unprecedented dimensions, such as climate change, population growth, poverty, lack of sustainable development, new cross-border threats to human security, changing patterns of global power and interdependence. There are expectations for the EU to be a more effective global actor in resolving these challenges. These expectations come not only from our own citizens but also from the rest of the world, who would mostly welcome a stronger role for the EU.

The European Union is a sui generis kind of organization. It has a variety of different instruments, including trade, economic and development cooperation and comprehensive crisis management instruments at its disposal. Now that the EU is starting the next five-year period with its new Parliament, Commission and also new High Representative, there is a chance for strengthening the structures and activities of the Union further. This opportunity must be used.

Finland is fully committed to further deepening the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in order to advance the EU’s global role. In addition to increasingly speaking with one voice in our external relations, we also support the development of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The current turbulence in areas adjacent to the EU only underscores the need for functioning European security structures also in the future.

It is clear that only through member states’ strong political commitment to the CSDP can the EU truly contribute to peace and stability in our neighbourhood and in the world. The next important milestone in the development of the CSDP is the European Council in June 2015. The CSDP is a work in progress, and Finland wants to ensure its success.

In the world of turbulence and many crises very close to us, the EU should be even more ambitious and clear in its neighbourhood policy (ENP). The EU’s neighbourhood policy is not about creating any European sphere of influence in a manner which would exclude other neighbours and countries. The EU is interested in having stable and prosperous neighbours who have good relations and no unresolved conflicts with other neighbours.

The EU should stress the ENP’s capability to influence and change lives of millions of people for the better. Recent events have impacted EU’s ability to reach its regional objectives, but the importance of effective cooperation and drive for development for the safer and more prosperous neighbourhood has not disappeared – quite the opposite. That is why Finland, with a number of other member states, is urging for a comprehensive review of the neighbourhood policy for it to be more effective and up-to-date.

We need to be able to tailor objectives, aims and use of instruments of the ENP framework, for it to serve better in the cooperation with very different countries. We must reassess the one-size-fits-all approach and deal with each region and each country more individually. We should also be able to vary the ENP agenda and concentrate on things that in every case have the highest importance, should it be energy, migration, economic reform or stability – and always approach each entity with the policy that is firmly based in our values.

Dear Friends,

Today serious conflicts are appearing in our immediate vicinity – in Ukraine and in Syria and Iraq in the Middle East. The conflict in Ukraine has wide and profound repercussions for the future of our continent. It has shown in operation the two different worlds that exist in parallel. The first one is the world of interdependence, which reflects the current reality where our economies, security and well-being are more dependent on other actors than ever before. The second one is the world of power politics, a world which some of us had already thought to belong into the past.

We have witnessed the attempts by Ukraine to come to terms with the world of interdependence. The Euro-Maidan movement was mainly a genuine popular uprising representing ordinary people tired with the old system – people demanding something more accountable and better instead. They wanted to see a new Ukraine that would successfully embrace the world of interdependence.

As for Russia, it is attempting to stave off these developments through the use of power politics. However, as the world continues to change, I believe that the time of securing lasting political gains by power politics is coming to an end. These measures can still be applied with some short-term success but I am increasingly sceptical about the long-term viability of this strategy.

The conflict in Ukraine is not simply a local or a bilateral Ukrainian-Russian issue, but a wider crisis that affects the very foundations of European security. It is clear that we have seen a harsh violation of collective and co-operative security in Europe. Our various institutionalized mechanisms have not been able to prevent the situation from escalating.

The EU neighbourhood policy never aimed at creating an exclusive sphere of EU influence at the cost of others and notably Russia. Mistakes the EU may have made with its Eastern Partnership do not justify any of the violations of international law and use of force resorted to by Russia, but they need to be analysed and taken into account when reviewing and renewing the ENP as I described earlier. Spheres of influence do not belong in our 21st century world of growing interdependence, they should be relegated to the past of old style power politics which no longer can bring any sustainable benefits for anyone.

In Ukraine, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has shown how indispensable its role still is. It is hard to imagine a lasting settlement to the current conflict without the OSCE and its principles taking the center stage in Europe again. Once the conflict has fully subsided – and I do hope that it will take place sooner rather than later – we must find ways to renew our commitments to common security in Europe.

Dear Friends,

The situation in the immediate neighbourhood of Turkey remains severe. Repression as an answer to the calls for democracy, justice and reforms has led into a brutal civil war in Syria. The violent conflict has spilled over to the neighbouring areas, merged with the bleeding instability of Iraq, led into an unbearable number of refugees and contributed to the creation of one of the most horrendous terrorist organizations of our time, ISIL.

Defeating ISIL requires extensive international cooperation. We cannot assume to solve the issue with air-strikes alone. We need a common will and a long-term comprehensive approach that tackles the root causes. We are pleased to see that more than 60 countries have joined the cooperative front against ISIL. We, as the international community, have to give our full support to the UN Special Envoy, Mr Staffan de Mistura, for his efforts to push for a political solution to the conflict, together with the countries of the region.

As the conflict persists, it is essential to continue supporting the refugees and the host countries. I would like to express Finland’s appreciation and deep gratitude to the host countries for their hospitality and generosity in providing protection for the Syrian refugees. With its 1,6 million refugees, Turkey has been carrying a very heavy burden. We must urge the international community to do its part in support of the countries receiving large amounts of refugees. As announced in late October, Finland has decided to support the Syrian refugees in Turkey with a new 2,5 million euros contribution to UNICEF.

PART 3: The future

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As we are celebrating the 90th anniversary of our friendship agreement, we can state that our friendship has officially reached a mature age. Being conscious of our history does not mean that we should live in the past, however. Quite on the contrary, we should jointly look into the future and the opportunities and challenges it brings. And when we talk about the future, it is essential that we do not let the current crises divert our attention from the existential threats facing humanity in the long term. Despite their long-term nature, the transition to ecologically, socially and economically sustainable development and coming to terms with the unavoidable impacts of climate change are challenges requiring our immediate action. They also have clear and present security implications.

Political contacts between Finland and Turkey remain strong, frank and close. We have seen frequent visits recently to both countries: President Gül visited Finland in 2008, and President Erdoğan visited Finland as Prime Minister almost exactly a year ago with a prominent business delegation. This year, many Finnish ministers have already visited Turkey and many visits have also been scheduled for 2015.

Our bilateral trade relations have a long history, but we must also admit that there is still much unused potential and opportunities for the future. We look forward to establishing the Joint Economic and Trade Commission very soon, as it will be a modern trade instrument catered for the needs of individual companies.

At international forums, Finland and Turkey share many goals and the collaboration has been fruitful. Finland and Turkey have founded the Group of Friends of Mediation at the United Nations, which has given us a leading role in mediation in the UN. The three resolutions in the General Assembly have strengthened the normative and institutional basis of mediation. At the same time, the Group’s size has quadrupled and presently stands at 48. I am sure that we will continue these efforts together also in the future.

Dear Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Finland and Turkey should work together for a Europe that is stable, prosperous, and a good place for its citizens to live in. Finland has always supported Turkey’s EU membership and we hope that the negotiation process would steadily take steps forward, together with Turkey continuing to work hard to meet the membership criteria. We therefore welcome Turkey’s new EU strategy, which we find constructive, realistic and target-oriented. Turkey belongs to Europe.

Let me conclude by expressing my warm gratitude for the long and fruitful relationship between Finland and Turkey that is based on shared experiences, memories, people-to-people connections, friendship and mutual respect. I am confident that Finland and Turkey are among the countries, also in the future, that through successful cooperation are able to find solutions to the most critical challenges of the world we inhabit.

Thank you.