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.
Alex Mashinsky, the founder and former CEO of the now-defunct cryptocurrency lending platform Celsius, faces a 20-year prison sentence as the US Department of Justice (DOJ) is seeking a severe penalty for his fraudulent activity.
The US DOJ on April 28 filed the government’s sentencing memorandum against Mashinsky, recommending a 20-year prison sentence due to his fraudulent actions leading to multibillion-dollar losses by Celsius customers.
The 97-page memo mentioned that Celsius users were unable to access approximately $4.7 billion in crypto assets after the platform halted withdrawals on June 12, 2022.
“The Court should sentence Alexander Mashinsky to twenty years’ imprisonment as just punishment for his years-long campaign of lies and self-dealing that left in its wake billions in losses and thousands of victimized customers,” the DOJ stated.
Mashinsky’s personal benefit was $48 million
In addition to listing massive investor losses resulting from the Celsius fraud, the DOJ mentioned that Mashinsky has personally profited from the fraudulent schemes in his role.
As part of his plea in December 2024, Mashinsky admitted that he was the leader of the criminal activity at Celsius, that his crimes resulted in losses in excess of $550 million, and that he personally benefited more than $48 million, the authority said.
An excerpt from the government’s sentencing memorandum against Celsius founder Alex Mashinsky. Source: CourtListener
The DOJ emphasized that Mashinsky’s guilty plea showed that his crimes were “not the product of negligence, naivete, or bad luck,” but rather the result of “deliberate, calculated decisions to lie, deceive, and steal in pursuit of personal fortune.”
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
The concept of a Russian ruble stablecoin received special attention at a major local crypto event, the Blockchain Forum in Moscow, with key industry executives reflecting on some of the core features a ruble-backed stablecoin might require.
Sergey Mendeleev, founder of the digital settlement exchange Exved and inactive founder of the sanctioned Garantex exchange, put forward seven key criteria for a potential “replica of Tether” in a keynote at the Blockchain Forum on April 23.
Mendeleev said a potential ruble stablecoin must have untraceable transactions and allow transfers without Know Your Customer (KYC) checks.
However, because one of the criteria also requires the stablecoin to comply with Russian regulations, he expressed skepticism that such a product could emerge soon.
The DAI model praised
Mendeleev proposed that a potential Russian “Tether replica” must be overcollateralized similarly to the Dai (DAI) stablecoin model, a decentralized algorithmic stablecoin that maintains its one-to-one peg with the US dollar using smart contracts.
“So, any person who buys it will understand that the contract is based on the assets that super-securitize it, not somewhere on some unknown accounts, but free to be checked by simple crypto methods,” he said.
Source: Cointelegraph
Another must-have feature should be excess liquidity on both centralized and decentralized exchanges, Mendeleev said, adding that users must be able to exchange the stablecoin at any time they need.
According to Mendeleev, a viable ruble-pegged stablecoin also needs to offer non-KYC transactions, so users are not required to pass their data to start using it.
“The Russian ruble stablecoin should have the opportunity where people use it without disclosing their data,” he stated.
In the meantime, users should be able to earn interest on holding the stablecoin, Mendelev continued, adding that offering this feature is available via smart contracts.
Russia opts for centralization
Mendeleev also suggested that a potential Russian version of Tether’s USDt (USDT) would need to feature untraceable and cheap transactions, while its smart contracts should not enable blocks or freezes.
The final criterion is that a potential ruble stablecoin would have to be regulated in accordance with the Russian legislation, which currently doesn’t look promising, according to Mendeleev.
Sergey Mendeleev at the Blockchain Forum in Moscow. Source: Bits.Media
“Once we put these seven points together […] then it would be a real alternative, which would help us at least compete with the solutions that are currently on the market,” he stated at the conference, adding:
“Unfortunately, from the point of view of regulation, we are currently going in the absolutely opposite direction […] We are going in the direction of absolute centralization, not in the direction of liberalization of laws, but consolidation of prohibitions.”
Possible solutions
While the regulatory side is not looking good, a potential Russian version of USDT is technically feasible, Mendeleev told Cointelegraph.
“Except for anonymous transactions, everything is easy to implement and has already been deployed by several projects, but it’s just not unified in one project yet,” he said.
The crypto advocate specifically referred to interesting opportunities by projects like the ruble-pegged A7A5 stablecoin, unblockable contracts at DAI, and others.
Regulation is necessary but not enough, Mendeleev said, adding that the most difficult part is the trust of users who must see the ruble stablecoin as a viable alternative to major alternatives like USDT.
Elsewhere, the Bank of Russia has continued to progress its central bank digital currency project, the digital ruble. According to Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, the digital ruble is scheduled to be rolled out for commercial banks in the second half of 2025.
The morning political podcast which gives you all need for the day ahead in 20 minutes, usually with Sky News’ Sam Coates and Politico’s Anne McElvoy.
But, for this episode, Anne is somewhere over the Atlantic travelling back from the US so Sam is joined by Politico’s Tim Ross.
Mark Carney’s Liberal Party has won the Canadian election. It’ll give Keir Starmer a centre-left ally at G7 but how will the PM position himself now in the Trump-Carney standoff?
Elsewhere, with political leaders out and about in Bristol, Scunthorpe, South Cambridgeshire and Wiltshire – there are plenty of clues about the biggest target seats in the last 48 hours before local election voting.