Â鶹ԼÅÄ

The complaints related to interviews with Baroness Prosser, a Labour Peer and Michael Walker, the Editor of Novara Media, about the sacking of an MP from the Shadow Cabinet for supporting striking workers.  Jeremy Vine challenged Baroness Prosser on the record of the Labour party in Government after she sought to highlight what she regarded as its success compared to the current Conservative government.  In doing so he made reference to the recession which began during Labour’s term in office.  The Baroness attributed this to an international banking crisis, and Mr Vine responded by questioning whether a problem in the US mortgage market, the trigger for the US credit crunch, could be blamed for the “collapse in our economy�.

Taking the exchange as a whole, the ECU did not consider Mr Vine was disputing Baroness Prosser’s explanation for the origin of the crisis but simply questioning whether an assessment of Labour’s record in government – which she lauded – could ignore the recession and the subsequent deficit in the UK.  He was, as he explained to listeners, putting the other side of an argument, and in the ECU’s view he was offering the kind of challenge which listeners might reasonably expect to hear.  The same consideration applied in relation to Mr Vine’s reference to the reason why the MP Sam Tarry had been sacked.  The programme highlighted the explanation which had been given by the Labour Party and this was reiterated by Baroness Prosser but Mr Vine then offered a different perspective.

The ECU took the view that the discussions were conducted with respect, whilst involving a degree of banter and challenge on all sides.  Whilst the ECU accepted the presenter put his points in robust terms, it concluded the audience would have understood he was simply questioning the official Labour line and not giving his own political opinion.
Not Upheld