FINALLY there has been common sense in regards to the ridiculous complaint made against presenter Naga Munchetty.

The BBC Breakfast presenter expressed her views on President Trump’s comments aimed at four US congresswomen, when he told them to ‘go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came’.

FAIR POINT: Fair Point: I want Brexit but on a no deal? No thanks, we can do better

In a discussion on the topic in July on the BBC News show, Ms Munchetty made the comment: "Every time I have been told, as a woman of colour, to go back to where I came from, that was embedded in racism.

"Now I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, but you know what certain phrases mean."

She added that she was furious with Trump's choice of language.

A viewer complained to the BBC about Ms Munchetty and co-presenter Dan Walker, and eventually the investigation focussed only on Ms Munchetty's comments.

And then, in a baffling and stupid verdict, the 44-year-old was found to be in breach of BBC guidelines on impartiality.

Fortunately, BBC director general Lord Hall has now reversed the decision.

The BBC has rightly always had impartiality guidelines, but presenters calling out racism have nothing to do with impartiality.

It was an honest comment, and she was actually reserved in the way she expressed it.

BBC impartiality should be about ensuring its journalism is objective and balanced politically. This case was a major misunderstanding of the BBC’s editorial guidelines.

READ MORE: Ex-soldier Reece Vella who fled to Thailand is jailed for more than four years for drug offences

Quite simply, you can't be breaking impartiality rules when you discuss racism - that surely should be common sense.

Racism is not a valid opinion to have an “impartial” stance on.

Apparently, BBC journalists feared the consequences of them even speaking out in support of her. At least the backlash led the director general to do the right thing.