Wahlroos is essentially an economic troll here. He wants to provoke the people a bit. Björn is a big bank CEO, heir to a wealthy family, lives very pompously in a large villa by the countryside. His ideas are usually pro-free trade anti-union "fiscal conservative" (using American terms) views with some politically Martian ideas here and there. Usually known as a proponent to tax cuts, threatened moving to Sweden over high taxes at some point. Just to give some context.

So to the basic income experiment, why do you think makes it flawed? The Ontario article's only criticisms were that it is unlikely to defeat poverty on its own, which would not be its purpose here anyways. The social programs right now are about the extent we can afford to reduce poverty. Basic income here is suggested as an alternative, simpler, and less bureaucratic approach to achieve the same goals as our current programs do, and also alter the financial incentives to make low paid work more attractive.

The Ontario one hasn't even started yet so their experiences won't be relevant for quite a while. We are essentially at the same phase right now, it will probably be interesting to compare the results in the future.