Johan Pehrson has financial interests in the security industry – at the same time as he politically pursues issues concerning the industry.
Criticism is now directed at the L-leader and an expert on corruption and inconsistency believes that it is contrary to the Riksdag’s code of conduct.
– It is completely unreasonable. Then no one will want to become a member of parliament, says Johan Pehrson to Aftonbladet.
Aftonbladet revealed how Johan Pehrson has financial interests in a company that offers security guards – at the same time as he is politically pushing for the state to invest billions in security guards.
Pehrson has also added the parliamentary motion “Broaden RUT to include security and safety services”.
Pehrson owns about ten percent of the company KB18 Företagsförädling, which owns and operates several companies. One of them is the security company Securus.
Johan Pehrson believes that his interests in the security industry are completely unproblematic – as he keeps his distance between business and politics.
At the same time, Aftonbladet’s review shows that the L-leader on several occasions marketed his company during his time in the Riksdag – and also described himself as an active owner.
Does not create trust
Now the L-leader’s actions are being criticized.
– It sounds like this is incompatible with the Riksdag’s code of conduct. It is a bit tricky to pursue policies that coincide with one’s private financial interest. It does not create trust, says Olle Lundin, professor of administrative law.
He also reacts to the fact that Pehrson during his time in the Riksdag used his platform on social media to market his own company:
– This gives lobbyism a completely new face to lobby for its own private economic interests while sitting in the Riksdag.
There is a risk
Folke Johansson, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Gothenburg, also sees problems with Pehrson’s financial self-interests:
– It seems that this has crossed the border. There is a risk that you will see it as a self-interest. It does not have to be that way, but there is a risk that it will be seen that way, and that alone is problematic.
The code of conduct for members of the Riksdag states that, among other things, they must “act to promote the public interest and not use their position for personal gain”.
It is also stated that “the assignment places high demands on integrity, and situations that can damage the people’s trust in the Riksdag should be avoided”.
But Johan Pehrson does not agree at all that he would break the code of conduct:
– I and many in the Riksdag save in different shares, some listed others are unlisted. We have different interests. In this when you enter the Riksdag, it is completely unreasonable to say that people who have forest must sell forest, people who have land must sell land. I have a company that invests in smaller companies widely and so should I need to sell it? It is completely unreasonable, then no one will want to sit in the Riksdag, he says when Aftonbladet meets him before his speech during Järva Week.
As a member of the Riksdag, you must avoid situations that could damage the people’s confidence in the Riksdag. Do you think that you did it?
– I think so, I reported when I ran in 2018 that I am a small business owner and have reported that I am a partner in KB18 Företagsförädling. I have no board assignments and have no operational transparency at all today. I am a passive owner but I am active and talk about it on Twitter and make no secret of it.
So you do not think this has affected voters’ confidence in you?
– I do not hope so. I hope that there are voters who appreciate that there are politicians who have other experiences that have only been politicians all their lives and I am a small business owner. It is good to understand the conditions of entrepreneurship because it is the companies that create wealth. It has been so for 200 years in fact.