I think it is - he say it hasnt een a discussion point, while the headline suggests it has

and he's been given an assurance to the contrary, which is clearly not the case.

Not discussing it and being given an assurance are two very different things.
If I were editing that, then I'd have the journalist change that as it's misleading - and tbf, that's exactly what my job entails

Posted By: Worzel Scrimmage, Dec 12, 19:40:17