Matt Hancock has accused Dominic Cummings of giving “inaccurate” evidence to the COVID inquiry as he refuted accusations he himself was a liar – while also claiming the first lockdown happening three weeks earlier would have saved “many, many lives”.
The former health secretary on Thursday spent the whole day giving evidence to the UK’s COVID inquiry – and will return to continue doing so Friday.
In an escalating war of words, Mr Hancock accused Boris Johnson’s former chief adviser of being a “malign actor” who created a “toxic culture” in Downing Street during the pandemic.
The broadside came as Mr Hancock was asked about accusations levelled at him that he had a habit of saying things that weren’t true when he held the top post in the health department.
Inquiry counsel Hugo Keith said a number of witnesses – including Mr Cummings, ex-chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance and former deputy cabinet secretary Helen MacNamara – referred to Mr Hancock as “lying”, “getting overexcited and just saying stuff” and saying things “which surprise people because they knew the evidence base wasn’t there”.
‘I was not’ lying
More from Politics
Mr Hancock said: “I was not.
“You will note that there’s no evidence from anybody who I worked with in the department or the health system who supported those false allegations.”
Advertisement
He added: “What there was, was a great deal of hard work on our side and a toxic culture that we had to work with, which seemed to want to find people to blame rather than spend all of their effort solving the problems.”
Mr Hancock went on to say that the “toxic culture” in government was “essentially caused by the chief adviser [Mr Cummings]” and the impact was that “others were brought into it”.
He said “the lesson for the future is systems need to be in place so that if there is a malign actor in No 10” or “people whose behaviour is unprofessional” then “the system needs to be able to work despite that”.
While defending his own relationship with the truth, Mr Hancock suggested that Mr Cummings’ testimony was “not accurate”.
He was presented with evidence the former adviser gave to the inquiry, saying that by 11 March – two weeks before the nation went into lockdown – it was generally understood a large percentage of the virus was being transmitted asymptomatically.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Mr Hancock said: “Well that is not accurate, as much of that particular witness’s evidence is not accurate, that is not accurate in all areas.”
In his attack on Mr Cummings, Mr Hancock also claimed the ex-top aide created a “culture of fear”, abused health department staff and “got in the way” of the response to the pandemic by trying to stage “a power-grab” and exclude ministers from meetings.
He said Mr Cummings had attempted to exert influence over decision-making in a way that was “inappropriate in a democracy”.
But Mr Cummings, who was heavily critical of Mr Hancock in his evidence to the inquiry, calling him a “proven liar”, hit back on social media that the former Tory MP is talking “rubbish”.
Nicola Richards lost 30 residents of her care home during the peak of the virus.
As she watched Matt Hancock give his evidence to the COVID-19 inquiry, she remembered the trauma of those days in spring 2020.
Mr Hancock admitted he failed to “throw a protective ring around care homes” – as he claimed at a Downing Street press conference in May 2020.
It brings back memories for me too. Because during the peak of the virus, I was with the staff and residents of Nicola’s care home in Sheffield, which was like thousands across the country in the grip of this unknown, invisible but deadly virus.
I witnessed for myself a lack of PPE, a shortage of tests for staff and patients discharged from hospital without being tested.
Patients gasping for breath, their relatives unable to be by their bedside in those final moments.
Nicola says she’s still dealing with the guilt of staff who likely came into contact with residents when they didn’t know they had the virus, potentially passing it on to the vulnerable.
Through the inquiry, Mr Hancock’s been accused of lying by his close political and scientific colleagues, but perhaps the worst verdict is from those who were on the front line on care homes.
“It’s incredibly raw to me. It’s upsetting to hear Mr Hancock speak about this three years on,” said Nicola.
“There was never a protective ring around care homes. We were left to fend for ourselves and the most vulnerable suffered.”
Locking down earlier, the care sector and Eat Out to Help Out
In the latter half of the inquiry, Mr Hancock was probed on various parts of the government’s response to the pandemic.
He said that 28 February 2020 was when the centre of government – including Mr Johnson – “really started to come into action”.
The former health secretary defended the path of action taken at the time, but said “with hindsight”, “that’s the moment we should have [locked down], three weeks, and it would have been would have saved many, many lives”.
The inquiry later moved on to the care sector and the way Mr Hancock described putting a “protective ring” around care homes.
At one point, messages sent from Mr Hancock’s then adviser, Jamie Njoku-Goodwin, on 13 May are shown to the inquiry. He tells his boss they might “have some issues” with Mr Hancock telling Mr Johnson care homes were “locked down” before the rest of the UK.
Image: Mr Hancock admitted there were holes in his ‘protective ring’ of care homes
The only evidence for Mr Hancock’s claim at the time was guidance from 13 March which told sick people and contractors to stay away from care facilities, and encouraged hand-washing.
Mr Hancock also admitted that his so-called “protective ring” around care homes was not an unbroken circle of protection and had holes in it.
The former health secretary confirmed to the inquiry that he had not heard about the controversial Eat Out to Help Out scheme – which discounted using hospitality after the first lockdown – before it was announced to cabinet and the public.
Messages show that – despite being told the scheme was “causing problems”, Mr Hancock told cabinet secretary Simon Case he had “kept it out of the news”.
He added that he had been “protecting [the Treasury headed by then chancellor Rishi Sunak] in the comms and thankfully it hasn’t bubbled up”.
The former cabinet minister claimed he did this because he believed government is a “team effort”.
Mr Hancock played a key role in the UK’s pandemic response but various witnesses have expressed concern about his approach, with the inquiry hearing that the country’s most senior civil servant wanted him to be sackedand another accusing him of displaying “nuclear levels of overconfidence”.
His political career was torpedoed after footage emerged in 2021 of his affair with aide Gina Coladangelo which broke social distancing guidelines.
He now sits as an independent MP after losing the party whip for appearing on ITV’s I’m A Celebrity reality TV show following his sacking.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
But the inquiry barrister questioned his claim, saying there was no entry in Mr Hancock’s book, Pandemic Diaries, recording such a conversation and no notes or emails in the inquiry’s possession to back up his version of events.
Homelessness charities have warned that ministers are “falling short of what is desperately needed to end Britain’s homelessness crisis”.
It comes as the government published its new plan to tackle rough sleeping in Britain, which pledges £3.5bn of funding to crackdown on the issue.
But charities have said Labour’s National Plan to End Homelessness “falls short” and contains “important gaps”, meaning the party will not be able to achieve their stated goal of halving the number of homeless people by 2029/30.
Crisis, an organisation that supports the homeless, also argues that only £100m of the funding announced in the strategy is new.
Meanwhile, Labour MP Paula Barker, who co-chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for ending homelessness, has told Sky News that the strategy has a “depressing lack of meat on the bone”, looks like it has been “rushed out”, and has left her “disappointed”.
It comes as Shelter warns that 382,618 people in England – including a record 175,025 children – will be homeless this Christmas, equivalent to one in every 153 people.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:44
Working but homeless: Daniel’s story
What does the government’s plan to reduce rough sleeping involve?
The government has made three key pledges in its new plan, unveiled on Wednesday evening.
It says that it is aiming to halve the number of long-term rough sleepers by the end of the parliament, reduce the time families spend living in bed and breakfasts (B&Bs), and prevent more people from becoming homeless in the first place.
To achieve this, the party has set out numerous new measures, schemes and extra funding.
The main measures in the strategy are:
Getting prisons, hospitals and social care services to work together better by passing a “duty to collaborate”;
Halving the number of people made homeless on their first night out of prison;
Preventing people being discharged from hospital straight to the street;
Helping the 2,070 households currently living for more than six weeks in B&Bs;
Giving councils an extra £50m – with the demand they create tailored actions plans.
A new £124m supported housing scheme is also being established, and the government hopes that it will help get 2,500 people in England off the streets.
Housing Secretary Steve Reed said homelessness is “one of the most profound challenges we face”, and suggested that the strategy will build “a future where homelessness is rare, brief, and not repeated”.
How has the plan been received?
Ms Barker told Sky News she welcomes “the scale of investment”, but is “disappointed by what I have seen”.
The Labour MP explained: “From what I have seen so far, it leaves more questions than it answers – where are the clear measures around prevention? Where is the accommodation for people sleeping rough coming from – has it already been built? What about specialised provision for those fleeing domestic abuse?
“We needed this strategy to be bold.”
Image: MP Paula Barker is ‘disappointed’ by what she has seen
Meanwhile, organisations working to support those on the streets have welcomed the plan for its focus on the issue, but warn it leaves it “almost impossible” for many families to avoid homelessness.
Matt Downie, the chief executive of Crisis, said: “Housing benefit remains frozen until at least 2030; there is no coherent approach for supporting refugees and stopping them becoming homeless; and we hear no assurances that the new homes government has pledged to build will be allocated to households experiencing homelessness at the scale required.
“There is a long way to go. Ministers are taking steps in the right direction, but falling short of what’s desperately needed to end Britain’s homelessness crisis.”
Image: An exhibit organised to highlight the contrast between the Christmas period and an estimated 23,500 young people who will homeless. Pic: PA
Sarah Elliott, head of Shelter, also warned the proposals do not go far enough, saying: “Until a lot more of these social homes are built, one of the only ways to escape homelessness is if you can afford to pay a private rent.
“We know from our frontline services this is almost impossible to do when housing benefit remains frozen, and that is where the homelessness strategy falls short.”
Centrepoint, a charity that supports young people facing homelessness, said that the strategy is “an important step”, and could be “transformative”. But it added that “gaps in the government’s approach remain”, and said increases in funding “don’t face up to the scale of homelessness”.
The Conservatives have said that the strategy means Labour “has completely failed on homelessness”.
Paul Holmes, shadow housing minister, said the number of households and children in temporary accommodation has risen to “record levels”, and pointed to the government’s “abysmal record on house-building” and tackling immigration.
Australia’s securities regulator has finalized exemptions that will make it easier for businesses to distribute stablecoins and wrapped tokens.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) on Tuesday announced the new measures, aimed at fostering innovation and growth in the digital assets and payment sectors.
It stated that it was “granting class relief” for intermediaries engaging in the secondary distribution of certain stablecoins and wrapped tokens.
This means that companies no longer need separate, and often expensive, licenses to act as intermediaries in these markets, and they can now use “omnibus accounts” with proper record-keeping.
The new exemptions extend the earlier stablecoin relief by removing the requirement for intermediaries to hold separate Australian Financial Services (AFS) licenses when providing services related to stablecoins or wrapped tokens.
Leveling the playing field for stablecoin issuers
The regulator stated that these omnibus structures were widely used in the industry, offering efficiencies in speed and transaction costs, and helping some entities manage risk and cybersecurity.
“ASIC’s announcement helps level the playing field for stablecoin innovation in Australia,” said Drew Bradford, CEO of Australian stablecoin issuer Macropod.
“By giving both new and established players a clearer, more flexible framework, particularly around reserve and asset-management requirements, it removes friction and gives the sector confidence to build,” he continued.
The old licensing requirements were costly and created compliance headaches, particularly for an industry awaiting broader digital asset reforms.
“This kind of measured clarity is essential for scaling real-world use cases, payments, treasury management, cross-border flows, and onchain settlement,” added Bradford.
“It signals that Australia intends to be competitive globally, while still maintaining the regulatory guardrails that institutions and consumers expect.”
Angela Ang, head of policy and strategic partnerships at TRM Labs, also welcomed the development, stating, “Things are looking up for Australia, and we look forward to digital assets regulation crystallizing further in the coming year — bringing greater clarity to the sector and driving growth and innovation.”
Global stablecoin growth surges
Total stablecoin market capitalization is at a record high of just over $300 billion, according to RWA.xyz.
It has grown by 48% since the beginning of this year, and Tether remains the dominant issuer with a 63% market share.
Stablecoin markets have surged in 2025, and Tether remains dominant. Source: RWA.xyz
A group of Republicans has called foul after the US House passed a massive defense spending bill on Wednesday that omitted a ban on central bank digital currencies despite promises it would be included.
“Conservatives were promised — explicitly — that strong anti-Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) language would be included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). That promise was broken,” GOP Representative Keith Self wrote to X on Wednesday.
The House voted 312-112 to pass the NDAA on Wednesday, sending the $900 billion annual military funding bill to the Senate in a bid to have it passed before the end of the year.
Self had filed an amendment on Tuesday to include a CBDC ban, which had been removed from the bill, but it failed to advance and did not see a vote on the House floor.
Self said a group of Republicans was “assured that anti-CBDC language would be included. Instead, we have been forced into a take-it-or-leave-it bill that breaks that promise. Without that language, I’m inclined to leave it.”
The more than 3,000-page bill is considered must-pass legislation and typically sees non-defense-related amendments that could otherwise be stalled or heavily revised if passed as standalone bills.
In July, House Republican leaders cut a deal with a group of party hardliners to put a CBDC ban in the defense spending bill after the group refused to move forward with three crypto bills unless a CBDC ban was guaranteed.
The bills had been held up in a record-long nine-hour procedural vote and included the stablecoin-regulating GENIUS Act, which President Donald Trump had pressured the GOP to quickly pass.
GOP Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene slammed Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday for not keeping his promise of a CBDC ban, adding she supports crypto but “will never support giving the government the ability to turn off your ability to have full control of your money and to buy and sell.”
An early House version of the bill shared in August had included a CBDC ban, before it was subjected to amendments via multiple markups and committees.
The language of the provision banned the Federal Reserve from testing, studying, developing or issuing any digital currency or asset. It would have also stopped the central bank from offering financial products or services directly to individuals.
In July, the House passed a bill banning CBDCs, the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, with a slim vote of 219-210, which has stalled in the Senate.
Self said he would “fight on in the next must-pass bill to ensure a CBDC never sees the light of day. Financial freedom isn’t negotiable.”