ITV viewers were left rather unimpressed on Tuesday morning after watching Kate Garraway interview the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, solo following co-host Ed Balls’ decision to temporarily leave proceedings.
Balls has faced a series of “bias” complaints from Good Morning Britain viewers in recent weeks when Labour ministers have appeared on the show, given his marriage to Cooper and former standing as a prominent politician for the party.
So on Tuesday, some fans would’ve been forgiven for finding it refreshing to see Garraway helm an interview with Cooper on her own. However, the line of questioning and manner of the interview still left plenty to be desired.
Top of the agenda for the discussion was the Home Office’s new “one-in, one-out” pilot scheme that it is rolling out in collaboration with the French in order to try and curb the number of small boat crossings in the Channel.
While Cooper and Labour have lauded the pilot as a whole, the scheme has faced criticism for not being strong enough given the vast number of asylum seekers crossing the Channel this year alone.
However, those expecting a sturdy interrogation of the numbers on GMB felt underwhelmed thanks to the – as one viewer described on social media – “cosy” interview with the Home Secretary.
“Good morning to you,” Garraway said as she kicked off the discussion with Cooper. “Can you just clear up when this (scheme) is coming? I think the Home Office told us yesterday it was today, but I believe on another broadcaster, you said it was actually tomorrow. Can we clarify that quickly?”
Cooper obliged. “That’s right, the treaty is being laid today, and the immigration rules that underpin it are being laid today. That means in practice they come into force tomorrow, and that means that we can start detaining people within a matter of days,” she explained.
“The way it will work is that when people arrive on these dangerous and illegal small boats, people can be immediately detained and then held in detention until they are returned to France.
“I think that’s really important, and this is a groundbreaking agreement because for the last six years of this small boats chaos, it’s not been possible to return anyone to France, even though that’s where the boats started from. It is a trial programme, but it is really important we get this into force.”
Once Cooper had finished, Garraway asked: “So a trial programme that I’m assuming you will then want to expand, particularly with the numbers, because, as you know, critics are already saying 50 out of the 25,000 already this year and the 1,000 in just the last week is the proverbial drop in the ocean and no deterrent at all.”
Cooper responded: “Well, the numbers will start lower and then build, but that’s the nature of this being a very new agreement. We need to trial different approaches, we need to get the processes working -“
In a rare moment of interruption, Garraway chipped in: “Sorry to interrupt you, but just for clarity on the numbers. When you say lower, do you mean lower than 50 and build to 50, or do you mean start at 50 and build to something more significant?”
“Start lower than they will finally end up. We’ve not set any numbers,” Cooper said with a smirk, which prompted Garraway to laugh at the intentional ambiguity. “That sounds like a politician’s answer! What are your hopes for where it could end up?” she asked with a chuckle.
A smiling Cooper replied: “So look, Kate, we’ve not set specific numbers, and there are two reasons for that. First of all, there isn’t a fixed number, and we do want this to build, but that will depend on the process, which will depend on how we make it work in both directions.
“The second is that we don’t think we should be giving the criminal gangs operational information in advance because they will just plan around it. If they think there are particular numbers in particular weeks, they will plan their boats around that, and they will plan their advertising around that.
“It is a vile trade in human beings that they are running, they have no scruples and no shame and we’re not gonna play into their hands so what we’ll do is we’ll release updates regularly on the number of people who are being detained, the number of people who are being returned, and of course, the number of people who are being transported to the UK who have applied through a legal process.”
As the interview rolled on, Garraway turned her attention to a case in Warwickshire involving two Afghan migrants who had been charged with rape and kidnap of a 12-year-old girl.
Garraway brought up the fact that police were believed to have wanted to withhold information regarding the suspects’ ethnicity. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has argued that the police should share this information moving forward for clarity with the public.
Cooper agreed: “So we want the greater transparency… It has been widely reported that these are two Afghan individuals and they are in the asylum system, and I think some of that information has been confirmed in court now as well.
“But we do want more information to be provided. We do recognise that it is an operational decision for the police and the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] to decide in a live investigation when information can be revealed, but the College of Policing is already looking at policing guidance and the Home Office is working with the police on how that guidance can be changed to make sure proper information is provided for people.”
Garraway raised the argument that releasing information of this kind could prove “problematic” for “innocent” asylum seekers who may end up feeling like targets as a result.
Cooper replied by saying she was hoping to implement a new system that would “ban sex offenders” from entering the asylum system. However, she claimed the opposing parties were blocking the bill.
The pair also went on to discuss problems in police and prison funding, with Lincolnshire Police facing the prospect of bankruptcy. Cooper’s answers went unchallenged throughout.
With Garraway being left to carry out the interview solo and with the manner of the interview proving a little too friendly for some, GMB viewers soon flocked to X to express their dismay.
“Wrap up this interview, this is so boring, Kate Garraway is making boring questions & a lot of waffling, I am falling asleep #gmb,” one X user complained.
A second hit out at the jovial manner of the debate: “Just remember today’s date when Garraway & Yvette Cooper were live on #GMB laughing & joking while discussing the most extremely serious crises we have in the UK… Heaven help our young!!!!”
“#GMB lovely cosy interview with Ed’s wife, the Home Secretary, this morning. Well done, Kate. They’re probably having dinner together tonight,” a third sarcastically commented while a fourth also raged: “#Gmb Garraway may as well ask her what Ed’s favourite soup is or curry… absolute waste of f***ing time this interview.”
Meanwhile, a fifth said: “@YvetteCooperMP should not be on @gmb when her husband @edballs is presenting, this is a farce. While I appreciate he does not interview his wife, it looks bad and she only gets grilled by one presenter #gmb.”
And a sixth brutally put: “This is a car crash of an interview by #YvetteCooper. The usual lip service from a Labour minister who has no clue what they’re doing and making it up as they go along. All talk. No results. #GMB.”
However, while some were unhappy with the nature of the discussion, several did jump to Garraway’s defence after feeling the ITV presenter was thrown somewhat under the bus by Balls and the show’s producers.
“This is not fair on Kate… Do the right thing GMB and get rid of Balls #GMB,” one X user argued before a second echoed: “Very weak interview. Not Kate’s fault, she’s been left on her own. #gmb.” (sic)