Dear Eddie,
In this letter I would like to give some feedback regarding your recent Boris Johnson interview. I will keep the points short, direct and simple; so I am hoping to get a response.
- Your interview begun with a question on immigration; it is a very sensitive and one that has been avoided for far too long in Britain just because we are scared we will be misunderstood and labelled with awful and disgraceful titles such as ‘racist’. So the first point is that I am happy David Cameron has built up the Stamina to raise the issues and engage in some controversial discussion, especially as it is clear that London specifically more than other parts of the UK is being overcrowded (and the statistics show it isn’t just the birth rate that accounts for this!). The second point, is that majority of immigration in the UK is beneficial (injecting our economy in multiple levels with benefits) and its so wonderful to have such a diverse mix of people, which is why London is one of the multicultural cities!. However, we cannot deny that there is a minority who are quite frankly ‘leeches’, whether it is out of necessity they find themselves leeching or otherwise. This should be no surprise as we see similar issues in the insurance and credit industry. There will always be the odd few. So I am not suggesting that everyone should be punished for this minority but rather that (a) the minority are dealt with and (b) while you are dealing with the minority why not review the whole immigration system and install some caps or some distribution mechanism so that the vast majority of immigrants are not concentrated in London which is quite overcrowded already. In the interview several attempts were made to make him seem anti-immigration which he is not, he is trying to deal with that minority and that is what I wanted to make clear to you.
- The next point you raised, was that the taxpayers got a ‘bad deal’ from the Olympic Stadium. Yes, that is true there is always a better deal to be made, whether selling your house or buying a new pair of shoes. But, I would not be so negative towards and show such disappointment towards Boris. Having a tenancy is much more profitable in the long-run with land prices going the way they are going and as Boris said they could be many more tenants and it has the potential to very profitable. The second point is, you implied that Boris was claiming he had to make the best out of a bad deal he got, but if Boris wanted to make that statement he would have made it years ago. I think the fact that he did not make such a statement shows great humility and empathy. I believe more politicians should be like him not putting blame on other politicians but rather focusing on the jobs that they have done, admitting where they have gone wrong and gracefully accepting the fruits where they have been right.
- The next point is regarding his affair. An affair is a personal matter, it involves private and emotional relations and is a sensitive matter. It was not correct to treat the matter so light-heartedly that it was an affair, why did you X or why did you do Y. So, I request that in the future, you are more sensitive to the issues surrounding personal relations. You say that this is an important point to discuss because it raises the question of the integrity of politicians. However, on this I think you are completely wrong. As I mentioned, affairs, relationships and family are complex matters filled with emotions. As humans, we act through are emotions not our brain in these matters and so this scandal involving him not coming clean about it, he was being swayed by gut feeling and sheer emotion. Also, on a serious note, who actually cares about these personal matter they are a great piece of gossip and is the same as watching Eastenders, but on a serious show like the Andrew Marr program, I expect policy, budget and international affairs to be discussed not personal matter. This is why I have no problem with the immigration or stadium question, those were good questions but you failed to understand Boris.
- Reminiscent to the earlier point, is your point regarding him being caught giving a journalist details.Again whether your a politician, a saint or a criminal, the one thing you have in common is your relationships and your loyalty towards them. I am not justifying Boris’ action, but I am saying that had I, you or Mother Teresa been put in a situation where a journalist hurt your friend and your friend wanted vengeance, you would do what you could to help support them. A good friend is one who is hurt when you are hurt. Although, to be honest I think you are acting foolishly contacting Conrad because not only is he a fraud-star, he is nothing compared to Boris. So by cooking up such stories he is getting fame and all the glitz and glamour that come with it, he is perversely incentivised. But should he be telling the truth, I request you to consider your loyalties towards your friends and how you act when terrible things happen to them. Furthermore, I am not even famous and yet there are plenty of people who when the time comes would claim to be my “friend” yet no absolutely nothing about me, so how reliable is your data?
- The point about his sister and parents saying he wants to be Prime Minister but Boris not admitting it. When you are a close family, your family is always looking on how to maximise your potential. So I worked as an intern somewhere and I heard my parents say to somebody she could run the firm one day she would like to, because of course this is maximising my potential but they hadn’t once asked me about this. Its similar, his family is proud of him and are pushing him to the next big thing, it isn’t necessary if they say so that it is what he really wants. Also, he is a grown man, I don’t think you should be relying on his family for career decisions he should make.
- Furthermore, your questioning of Boris becoming PM was self-defeating and I think you should be ashamed of having defeated yourself on national TV. You first asked Boris why would you not admit you want to be PM (even though everyone is entitled to their own personal private desires but for some reason Boris is obliged to share them). Boris responded that the proposition was unrealistic and never going to happen. You then said who cares about realistic-ness it is about desire. Boris already told you a handful of things he desired, but you chose to dismiss it because you said you want to discuss more realistic career ambition. So he can’t say he wants to be PM because it is unrealistic, and it is actually very unlikely the chance that could be PM. Boris isn’t robotic and unattached enough to be a PM.
- You then, go on to criticise Boris, asserting he can’t give you a straight answer, but he did! You said what are your desires and he responded to be a painter, part of rock band etc. Why would you force someone to say something just to create a bit of media frenzy. I think its time you have a look at your own integrity before questioning others.
- Also, I just don’t see why these matter are important. Quiz Boris on policy transport, budgeting then I might be able to support you not ludicrous personal matters which basically unless you are the parties involved you will never know what actually happened.
- Finally, Boris isn’t any ordinary politician, just look at his appearance! This is why he is so popular, it is because he is human, swayed by emotions and is someone you can connect with as opposed to the other robotic MPs. This is his biggest weakness at the same time. He doesn’t spend enough time using his head especially when it comes to personal issues regarding his affair etc, but how much can you criticise him for being too human. The great thing about Boris is, because he is human feels emotion and carried by passion he gets stuff done like the upgrades in transport and on-time Olympic delivery unlike others.
Sincerely yours,
Komilla Chadha
No comments:
Post a Comment