Matt Hancock allegedly rejected COVID-19 testing advice for residents going into England’s care homes while he was health secretary during the worst of the pandemic, according to a report based on thousands of leaked WhatsApp messages.
The Daily Telegraph claims that chief medical officer Professor Sir Chris Whitty had told Mr Hancock in April 2020 that there should be testing for “all going into care homes and segregation whilst awaiting a result”.
But the leaked messages suggest Mr Hancock rejected that advice, telling an aide that the move “muddies the waters”, instead introducing mandatory testing just for those coming from hospitals.
According to the investigation, he said: “Tell me if I’m wrong but I would rather leave it out and just commit to test and isolate ALL going into care from hospital.
“I do not think the community commitment adds anything and it muddies the waters.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:49
April 2020: Care home life under lockdown
He also expressed concerns that expanding care home testing could “get in the way” of the 100,000 daily test target he wanted to hit, the investigation said.
The messages were leaked by journalist Isabel Oakeshott, who received them while working on Mr Hancock’s Pandemic Diaries memoir.
She said she was releasing them because it would take “many years” before the official COVID inquiry is completed and “we absolutely cannot wait any longer for answers”.
Advertisement
‘I want to hit my target’
Also included in the messages:
• In September 2020, during a test shortage, one of Mr Hancock’s advisers helped to send a test to the home of senior Tory Jacob Rees-Mogg for one of his children.
• As he struggled to meet the testing target, Mr Hancock texted former Tory chancellor George Osborne to ask for help.
He said the thousands of spare testing slots were “obvs good news about spread of virus” but “hard for my target”.
Mr Osborne, editor of the Evening Standard until July 2020, had responded: “Yes – of course – all you need to do tomorrow is give some exclusive words to the Standard and I’ll tell the team to splash it.”
Mr Hancock had later added: “I WANT TO HIT MY TARGET!”
Hancock claims have opened ‘Pandora’s box’ on COVID care home scandal
The extraordinary leak today of some of the 100,000 Whatsapp messages relating to the pandemic, has put the heat on former health secretary Matt Hancock.
He denies the central claim, that he ignored the advice of Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, to test everyone going into care homes. His spokesman says what the messages do not show is that he was advised this was not deliverable, and says he was selectively quoted.
What’s not in dispute is that these messages are genuine – Hancock handed them over to the anti-lockdown journalist Isabel Oakeshott when she co-authored his Pandemic Diaries last year. He was perhaps naive in expecting they wouldn’t be made public.
Hancock’s spokesman is claiming she breached a non-disclosure agreement. Oakeshott makes a strident public interest defence of the leak saying that the public, especially those who lost relatives, deserve to know – and that the slow progress in getting the COVID inquiry up and running means that process would otherwise have taken years.
Care home deaths are widely regarded as one of the biggest scandals of the pandemic response. And The Telegraph promises more revelations in the coming days on school closures and the effect on the economy.
Yes, the newspaper’s coverage may be agenda-driven, but the raw messages are out there, and there is no escape for ministers and officials – the Pandora’s box has been opened and they will start to shape the narrative of who did what and when. All those implicated will need to get their arguments ready.
Hancock ‘considering all options’
A source close to Mr Hancock said: “[Ms Oakeshott] has broken a legal NDA [non-disclosure agreement].
“Her behaviour is outrageous.
“Having not been approached in advance by The Telegraph, we have reviewed the messages overnight.
“The Telegraph intentionally excluded reference to a meeting with the testing team from the WhatsApp.”
What is an NDA – and what happens if you break one?
A Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) is a contract between two parties designed to keep specific information confidential.
The two parties are the information provider, or the disclosing party, and the recipient – the person being given the information.
NDAs can be one-way or mutual and usually last between three and five years.
Most commonly they are used by businesses or organisations when hiring a new employee, contractor or consultant to protect sensitive information that person will be privy to in their role.
The other way they are often used is around intellectual property – an invention, idea, book, TV or film.
Breaking an NDA has legal consequences.
First the information provider may send a cease-and-desist letter to stop any further disclosures, but if this doesn’t work they can sue them for damages or get a court injunction.
Court cases are costly and time consuming, so the parties may agree to settle out of court.
A court injunction will make any further disclosures contempt of court, which can result in an unlimited fine or a prison sentence.
“This is critical,” the source added, “because Matt was supportive of Chris Whitty’s advice, held a meeting on its deliverability, told it wasn’t deliverable, and insisted on testing all those who came from hospitals.
“The Telegraph have been informed that their headline is wrong, and Matt is considering all options available to him.
“This major error by Isabel Oakeshott and The Telegraph shows why the proper place for analysis like this is the Inquiry, not a partial, agenda-driven leak of confidential documents.”
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Mr Hancock said: “It is outrageous that this distorted account of the pandemic is being pushed with partial leaks, spun to fit an anti-lockdown agenda, which would have cost hundreds of thousands of lives if followed. What the messages do show is a lot of people working hard to save lives.”
Russell Brand has been charged with rape and two counts of sexual assault between 1999 and 2005.
The Metropolitan Police say the 50-year-old comedian, actor and author has also been charged with one count of oral rape and one count of indecent assault.
The charges relate to four women.
He is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday 2 May.
Police have said Brand is accused of raping a woman in the Bournemouth area in 1999 and indecently assaulting a woman in the Westminster area of London in 2001.
He is also accused of orally raping and sexually assaulting a woman in Westminster in 2004.
The fourth charge alleges that a woman was sexually assaulted in Westminster between 2004 and 2005.
Police began investigating Brand, from Oxfordshire, in September 2023 after receiving a number of allegations.
The comedian has previously denied the accusations, and said all his sexual relationships were “absolutely always consensual”.
Met Police Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy, who is leading the investigation, said: “The women who have made reports continue to receive support from specially trained officers.
“The Met’s investigation remains open and detectives ask anyone who has been affected by this case, or anyone who has any information, to come forward and speak with police.”
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
More on China
Related Topics:
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
Image: These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
Image: The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Image: Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:08
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.