Ed Balls sat out a Good Morning Britain interview with his wife Yvette Cooper in order to avoid a bias row that previously caused thousands of Ofcom complaints.
The breakfast show presenter informed ITV viewers on Monday (2 March) that he would not be conducting the chat with Cooper, who was appearing on the show in her position as Labour’s foreign secretary.
Balls’s co-host Susanna Reid explained that GMB was going to speak to Cooper about an overnight drone strike at a UK RAF base in Cyrpus, as well as the government's plan to support British Nationals stuck in the Gulf.
Reid turned to Balls, stating: “I'll be doing that interview, of course, because Yvette is obviously your wife.” Balls replied: “I think I'll sit this one out.”
Balls no longer interviews Cooper, whom he has been married to for more than 25 years, after causing a bias row when he did so in August 2024.
At the time, Cooper was interviewed after Labour received criticism for its response to the riots and far-right civil unrest spreading across the country, and Balls’ impartiality was thrown into question as a consequence. The interview received 8201 complaints.
His softer approach was noted when compared with an earlier interview with Labour MP Zara Sultana, whom he repeatedly interrupted as she urged political leaders to condemn the protests as “Islamophobic” and “racist”.
Balls being permitted to interview Cooper was also compared to previous cases against broadcaster GB News, which Ofcom found to have broken the rules when Tory MPs working as presenters interviewed other Tory MPs.
The Home Secretary and GMB presenter have been married for over 25 years and have three children together – they were the first married couple to serve in government alongside each other back in 2008.
It’s worth noting that Ofcom currently does not include restrictions on such specifics of a husband interviewing his wife, but due impartiality laws states: “No politician may be used as a newsreader, interviewer or reporter in any news programmes unless, exceptionally, it is editorially justified. In that case, the political allegiance of that person must be made clear to the audience.”
