[This message is brought to you thanks to our friends at Trafigura]
Boris’s trip to New York [sponsored by British Airways] came as something of a surprise, but it was no real surprise to find it was basically a PR exercise – the @MayorOfLondon Twitter feed went nuts
- http://twitpic.com/htact – Just arriving at Manhattan Institute with good friend Mayor Bloomberg
- http://twitpic.com/hplji – Anna Jones interview outside the old Lehman’s HQ
- http://twitpic.com/hpaqm – Live on Fox News
- http://twitpic.com/hm6yx – Media in Times Square
- http://twitpic.com/hlbs1 – Interview with US media
Probably half of them were some media interview or flag-waving opportunity for Boris to get his face on TV, which does lead one to wonder what changed – after all, London’s international affairs were a symbol of hubris and waste last year while cuts to the marketing budget were the order of the day but now Boris is spending a week gallivanting around New York apparently (since he took Guto Harri with him) to be as visible as possible.
[Before reading on, why not have a refreshing Coca-Cola? Mmmm!]
What changed, of course, is that he found someone else to pay for it, thus allowing him to have his PR cake and eat it. This does mean he had to spend a lot of time as a walking billboard for the struggling national airline and a rapacious US entertainment corporation but, hey, if it saves 5p off the precept it’s got to be worth it, eh?
[And now a word from our sponsor: New Business service to New York launching from London City Airport 29th September 2009! Thanks for allowing more flights from LCY, Boris!]
Well, no, it doesn’t. Boris is elected to represent London, not British Airways or Disney or Sky or whoever and, while sponsorship isn’t inherently evil, allowing it to take over a bilateral visit to a key partner city to the extent Boris did is not on. As an example, British Airways are pro-Third Runway while Boris, at least at the moment, is against it. There’s therefore got to be a suspicion that giving him and his entourage free flights to the States isn’t entirely altruistic, plus the timing of Boris urging US businessmen to fly to London just before BA launch a new direct business service to New York is, um, suspicious. Likewise Sky are trying to brand the whole of British cycling with the enthusiastic help of Boris, while their parent company is charging around trying to kill the BBC and doubtless counting on the anti-BBC feeling on the right of the Conservatives to help them. There’s no such thing as a free lunch.
Other coverage:
Tags: 2 Comments
2 responses so far ↓
Surely “promoting your constituency’s businesses abroad, for jobs and that” – whether or not a good thing – is an accepted part of what any elected politician is supposed to do? The government shills for British businesses abroad, and (at least when they’re not arms dealers) I don’t think that’s generally seen as a bad thing.
Similarly, BA employs tens of thousands of people in Greater London, so it’s fair enough for Boris to promote it abroad. Fair point on the 3rd runway, but that’s mostly an amusing clash between two hard-wired Tory instincts (NIMBYism and support for big business…)
I kind of agree with John’s comments. I don’t think we can deny that the Mayor’s trip generated positive headlines and goodwill towards London in the US.
However, we find ourselves in a political climate where travel expenses are under huge scrutiny. Even without this, Boris had kind of backed himself into a corner over foreign travel with various statements being made during the election campaign that “foreign travel for mayor = bad”
So we find ourselves in an interesting quandary. Do we accept that foreign travel can be justified for our mayor in some cases, or do we hold the purse strings so tightly that he’s forced to accept sponsorship? Personally I think spending £5000 for flights and hotels for the mayor and an aide or two is probably more preferable than a mayor compromising their integrity through sponsorship.