Piers Morgan’s interview with Keir Starmer showed he is everything Boris Johnson is not

Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

The Labour became emotional on the ITV programme (ITV)

Completely by chance, randomly switching TV channels last night, I happened across Piers Morgan’s ITV interview with Keir Starmer and was really impressed.

I thought he came across as an intelligent, genuinely admirable and nice guy. A completely different kettle of fish from Boris Johnson who is none of these things.

Coming from a normal background, he attained his knighthood through diligence and hard work. I sincerely hope that he becomes our next prime minister because he, at least, fully understands the injustices and deprivations that so many people who are not well heeled in this country suffer from.

Linda Evans

Address supplied

I watched Keir Starmer on Piers Morgan’s Life Stories and think he acquitted himself pretty well under the avuncular gaze of Morgan. His backstory is interesting and I feel the public will warm to him after hearing about the debilitating illness and death of his beloved mother and his more complex relationship with his father.

Andrew Grice is correct – the personal rubicon has now been crossed and he might well find that this is a necessary proactive step to take. To give the public a more rounded take on him. This programme might indeed prove pivotal, so I feel it was worth a shot.

Even his wife Victoria looked suitably nonplussed to find out that his second name is Rodney. What a revelation!

Judith A Daniels

Great Yarmouth, Norfolk

Only the beginning

I see that arch-Brexiteer, Tim Martin, has said that he needs to easily recruit staff from Europe for his Wetherspoons pub chain.

Yes, that is the same Europe that he spent years lambasting and campaigning to end the freedom of movement that made working, studying, retiring and living across the entire EU seamless.

He, along with many others, never gave any thought to the consequences of this crazy idea to leave the largest trading bloc in the world. This is only the beginning and many more examples will shortly become very apparent.

Robert Boston

Kingshill, Kent

Professional pawns

I agree with Atul M Karnik (Letters, 1 June) that the treatment of Naomi Osaka by French Open tennis officials was shocking. But, unfortunately, it’s not at all surprising.

Professional sport is an industry; its purpose is to make money for those in charge. The players are often merely pawns in the game. Some of them may be highly paid, but pawns they are, nonetheless. We saw not long ago how young gymnasts were bullied into injuring themselves for short-term gains.

Some of those in charge coach young, vulnerable people in order to make money out of them. The young are vulnerable because they have not yet outgrown the need to win, and can be persuaded that they can achieve fame and fortune. Most of them, of course, do not acquire either.

Even when athletes are not being cruelly manipulated, there is a cynicism in many sports that relies upon the base instincts of tribalism that lurk within all of us – to provide fans who will pay for tickets to watch the performance. The whole exercise would be impossible (and therefore no money made) without a "losing" side. However skilled the participants, mistakes are bound to be made. So why have, as part of the game, a ritual verbal assault on the "loser"?

Seeing something done really well can be uplifting, but does it really matter which individual or team manipulates a ball more successfully?  Can we not rejoice in the skill of both sides, without getting steamed up about who scores more points?

Susan Alexander

Frampton Cotterell, South Gloucestershire

Third lady

In view of the prime minister’s previous marriages, shouldn’t Carrie Johnson now be known as “The Third Lady”?

Peter Coggins

Oxford