Twaddle. It may be an emergency if the other one then fails, but if one is just shutdown or otherwise stops, that doesn't necessarily mean the subsequent landing will be any less-safe than normal
Way too many PPLs on this forum...
But no, maybe he is right. From now on, it should be SOP that all twins must shut an engine down on finals. Saves fuel, saves wear on the engine, and of course asymmetric landings are just as safe as ones with all engines operating, right?
I mean, who needs that extra generator... that extra hydraulic pump... just a waste, really. And the loss of reverse isn't even a consideration.
And, of course, single-engine go-arounds at heavy weights are just as safe as normal go-arounds, right?
And just because the QRH doesn't say "land as soon as possible", doesn't mean you shouldn't do so. The danger might not be as iminent as an engine fire or a loss of anti-icing (the usual reasons for a "land as soon as possible"), but it is still danger, n'est pas? Burning off fuel is fine, but I bet you wouldn't do it far away from a suitable runway.
And unless somebody can show me a checklist for a transport-category aircraft that doesn't include an engine failure as an "emergency", it IS one. The aircraft manufacturer thinks so, airlines think so, airports and their fire services think so, and the public think so.
The only group who don't think so are a minority of idiot pilots who have egos ten times the size of their seldom-used brains...