Apart from ownership and regulation, viewpoints relating to the functionality and effects of the electricity markets were also assessed. The expansion of the market to the Nordic countries is experienced as a positive thing, at least in respect of the availability of electricity. According to the majority (62%) of respondents, 'Finland's presence in the pan-Nordic electricity market ensures that there will be no shortage of electricity in Finland'. Only a small minority disagrees with this claim (8%). Like-mindedness has increased rather than decreased on the previous year. Without underestimating the benefits of a common market, it can still be stated that in poorer times - during periods of drought - the other Nordic countries have probably no electricity to sell either [Figure 35.].

Naturally, dependency on other countries is, nevertheless, an unfavourable situation. The claim that 'Finland should be self-sufficient in its electricity generation, without dependency on the economic trends of the international electricity trade' is supported by two out of three respondents (67%). The more or less pious hope about self-sufficiency is now nearly as common as a year ago. The completion of a new nuclear power plant will probably contribute to the realisation of this hope (no figure).

Attitudes were also tested on a slightly more everyday level. The present system has been criticised in public for 'excessive cost-consciousness', which has been claimed to manifest itself in diminished security of supply in connection with storms and blackouts. Other measures of developing profitability have also been criticised. The accusation 'as a result of market competition, the electricity companies aim to improve their price competitiveness only by cutting costs, not by developing new electricity generation' is agreed with by more than one in two (58%). Only about one in ten (11%) dare to disagree with this claim, while the number of those in doubt is great. This result is in practice identical with the result received a year ago (55% agreed, no figure).

Naturally, the key touchstone for the new system is its impact on the price of electricity. The follow-up meter that charts the past price impacts of market competition brings out a significant development. The proportion of those who think that competition has reduced the price of electricity consumed by their own household used to diminish strongly from year to year so that the aggregate change became substantial. The most recent result indicates that this trend has broken and the opinions have returned to the level of two years ago (2002). Now (again) almost one in four (23%) believe in a positive impact on the price of electricity. The proportion of those denying the fact has decreased from three in five (59%) to less than one half (47%). Not only variable feelings but also variable facts can be found behind the changes. The turns in the assessment are obviously linked to the price development of electricity. Criticism increased with the consumer prices of electricity. The most recent turn reflects an easier price situation [Figure 36.].

The results also give a total grade for the functioning of the electricity market. As the system is still fairly new and adaptation to its practices is still under way, it is a question of an interim analysis of the situation. Despite all the criticism, the public verdict is not condemning, albeit not acquitting either. The claim on the subject, 'now that there is a few years' experience in the deregulation of the electricity market, it can be said that the solution was successful', arouses substantial uncertainty. However, somewhat more people accept this claim (32%) than deny it (25%). This distribution is slightly more accepting than in the previous year. The great number of those who have no opinion (now 43%) can be interpreted as a kind of anticipatory 'let's see' attitude. The future will show which way public opinion will sway [Figure 37.].