The Mayoral battle is on its finishing line now. Next Thursday Londoners will vote on who should be their next Mayor, though Twitter predicts Conservative candidate Zac Goldsmith may as well pack his bag and leave.
London is home to almost 11% of UK's population. The City supports immigration, is the centre of the country's financial services- churning out almost £30bn annually and offers different scales of jobs to people, encouraging investments. The London Mayor has a very powerful position- not only financially but also he controls the city's 40,000 police force- law and order to a great extent, as well as the transport- the nerve centre of the city.
Labour candidate Sadiq Khan followers have jumped on a new poll by YouGov that suggests that Goldsmith has slipped down to be 16% behind Khan and would go on to lose once second preferences were allocated with just 40% of the vote. But whatever be the situation- speculations and analysis on one side, should one really think it is time to declare Khan as the next Mayor?
We can't help remaining skeptical, especially for two reasons. First who wins finally is decided by the voters that turn up to vote. There could be series of debates before the actual voting date- but unless one castes their vote- no one can tell who gets the majority. Therefore it is important that we ensure that everybody we know turns up to vote.
Second, while Sadiq is pumped to achieve something remarkable- sprinting from door to door- hoping to be the first Muslim Mayor of a major Western city, at a time of heightened tension over Islamist extremist terrorism in Brussles and Paris- there are other things besides his faith and links to extremists that one should worry about. He has a great team of support including CEO of rational FX, Rajesh Agrawal as one of his campaign consultants. But the problem lies in Khan's choice of friends, if not relatives (pun intended). As Lord Sugar pointed out- Sadiq Khan is responsible for 'handing over' the Labour party to a leader like Jeremy Corbyn. Sugar apparently had tore up his membership card after the general election- accusing Khan of being the politician most to blame for nominating Corbyn for the leadership. He reportedly said, “Khan has single handedly wrecked the Labour party, and now he is turning his finely honed judgement on the great city of London...Be under no illusion they (Khan and Corbyn) are two peas in a pod...”
During this Mayoral campaign, Khan has tried to maintain his distance from the Labour leader, of course in order to attract moderate votes, but there is only so much damage control possible.
The Hindu community and many of UK's 1.4mn Indians are great supporters of the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. During Mr Modi's historical visit, Corbyn's attitude could not be ignored- especially as it came to light that he had signed an Early Day Motion 479 in September 2013- asking to ban Modi from entering Britain, given his alleged role in the 2002 communal violence in India that claimed the lives of hundreds of Muslims, including British nationals. What Mr Corbyn missed to realise is that almost equal number of Hindus had died in the same riot, and the Supreme Court of India had found the Indian PM, 'not-guilty'. Nothing is greater than the judgement of the electorates- neither Corbyn is an Indian nor a resident of India- he is not entitled to ask for a ban on one of world's most popular leader to visit the UK, under his official capacity.
What Her Majesty's Opposition leader is duty bound, is, to provide an answer to the Hindus in Britain, especially the Labour supporters- of a letter (first written by former Lib Dem Councillor Chuni Chavda) that they have been sending over and over again asking what Corbyn's views are now, after terrorist David Headly's testimony; requesting the Labour party leader to tender an apology to Mr Modi and withdraw or disassociate from EDM 479. None of which has happened so far. A border line patronising letter has been sent in response from the Labour party- which even remotely does not address the queries.
This brings us to the question if Sadiq Khan will be supported by the Hindus or Indians of London- as their favourite world leader awaits justice from Khan's chosen party leader. A silence of convenience from Jeremy Corbyn can cause a huge damage to the deserving Mayoral candidature of Khan.
On the other hand, Zac Goldsmith is a man with a big policy idea. Of Jewish descendants- he is ultimately like Khan, a child of an immigrant- yet his vast wealth (note mention of him in the recent Sunday Times Richlist) and place in the society puts him away from the regular realities of London or Londoners. Moreover while he has tried to 'woo over' Britain's Indian population with a unique manifesto, it's ironical that he has pointed at Khan's faith over of his credibility, with Jemima Khan, the famous Pakistani politician Imran Khan's ex-wife and his sister as his confidant. It is well known that one of Imran and Jemima's teenage son is driving the youth campaign for Goldsmith's Mayoral election and it is believed Imran has also lent his expertise to win this election for his former brother-in-law.
The Conservative Party's Zac Goldsmith and Labour Party's Sadiq Khan have had many months to show themselves equal to London, which will vote on a successor to Boris Johnson on May 5. They have both failed. London is very naturally a diverse and dynamic city. While son of a bus driver, Khan with a very moderate beginning- has never been Labour's star, similarly Goldsmith's campaign jars with the daily reality- which might explain it's failure to take off the runway. Both must realise that London does need a great Mayor to prosper. The character of the campaign matters too- but whoever loses on May 5, he should try not to lose with dishonour.
