In addition to ownership and regulation, viewpoints relating to the functionality and effects of the electricity markets were also assessed. According to earlier surveys, the pan-Nordic scope of the market has been regarded as a positive factor in that it ensures the availability of electricity. Nevertheless, dependency on other countries has always been felt to be a negative 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 more than four out of five respondents (82%). The wish for independence has visibly strengthened since the previous year, and is now higher than ever. The completion of the fifth nuclear power plant currently under construction will help to realise this wish [Figure 37.].

The importance of self-sufficiency is also indicated in other parts of the survey. The discussion on the undersea electricity cable from Russia has not created enthusiasm in the citizens despite the potential price cuts offered. The suggestion 'an underwater cable to import electricity from Russia would be a good solution' was only approved by one in six (16%). Despite the fairly large share of those unsure (33%), more than half of the respondents (52%) took an openly opposing position [Figure 38.].

The indirectly connected thesis on the selfishness of nations in energy crises leaves even less room for interpretation. Nearly all respondents (85%, no figure) agree with the view that 'talk of security offered by the international electricity market is nonsense, since in an emergency every nation only wishes to secure their own electricity supply'. In other words, if the cable is risky, so is basically all other dependence on other countries as well. When examining these results, new reservations observed in opinions on natural gas and the increased emphasis on risks relating to the availability of the gas should also be remembered (Chapter 1.2.).

Naturally, the key touchstone for the new system is its impact on the price of electricity. The follow-up measurement that charts the respondents' experience of the price impacts of market competition shows clear trends. This indicator, already proven unusually inconsistent, now shows a new twist. Less than one in five (18%) now consider that competition has reduced the price of electricity used by their own household. More than half of the respondents disagree (58%). Together with the result of 2003, the result is the most pessimistic of the entire history of the survey. The contrast is accentuated by the development toward more positive opinions in the two previous years (2004 and 2005). Before this, in 1999-2003, the share of those believing in the positive effect of the competition had decreased every year, totalling a rather sizeable change. Not only changing feelings but also changing facts can be found behind these turns in the trend. There appears to be a connection to the price development of electricity and the public discussion of it [Figure 39.].

The defensive claim heard in connection with the increases in the price of electricity stating that 'electricity is cheaper in Finland than in most of the other EU countries' evokes considerable uncertainty (50%). However, somewhat more people consider this to be true (29%) than false (21%). Knowledge of this issue - we can talk about knowledge since the price of electricity is a fact based on international comparative statistics - is now a little more common than in the previous year. This does not, however, alleviate the feelings of citizens. What evokes reactions on the estimates of an issue is the change observed, not the absolute or relative level of it [Figure 40.].