Hubbry Logo
Lockdown FilesLockdown FilesMain
Open search
Lockdown Files
Community hub
Lockdown Files
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Lockdown Files
Lockdown Files
Lockdown Files
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Picture of Matt Hancock
The messages were given to Isabel Oakeshott by Matt Hancock to help write his book. His details were included in stories.
Picture of Simon Case
Many messages reported were between Permanent Secretary in Number 10, Simon Case and Hancock
Picture of Chris Whitty
Messages included details of Chief Scientific Adviser, Chris Whitty's advice to the government
Rishi Sunak
Messages revealed disagreement in policy between Hancock and then Chancellor Rishi Sunak
People mentioned in the Lockdown Files series
Part of a series on the
COVID-19 pandemic
in the United Kingdom,
British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies
(Part of the global COVID-19 pandemic)
Locations
  • Countries
  • British Overseas Territories without confirmed cases
Timelines
  • England
  • Scotland
  • Wales
  • Northern Ireland
Key topics
  • Healthcare
  • Impacts

The Lockdown Files are a series of articles in The Daily Telegraph containing evidence, analysis, speculation, and opinion relating to more than 100,000 WhatsApp messages obtained from former health secretary Matt Hancock that were leaked to them.[1][2]

The material, relating to the COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom, was given to The Telegraph by Isabel Oakeshott, who had worked with Hancock on his book Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott said that the release of these messages was motivated by the slow pace of the UK COVID-19 Inquiry and her concern that the findings might be a "whitewash", citing public money being used in legal action to redact the names of officials.[3]

Articles about COVID-19 response

[edit]
See also: British government response to the COVID-19 pandemic

The Telegraph argue that some messages show an intent on the part of Hancock and several members of his team to cause fear in the general public through their messaging in order ensure compliance with public health policy. In response to public rumours about coming local lockdowns following a local lockdown in Leicester, special adviser Jamie Njoku-Goodwin commented that the rumours were not unhelpful since a fear of a local lockdown would encourage individuals to be responsible.[4][5]

The Telegraph reported that alpha variant was implicated as a cause for higher cases in Kent on December 10, 2020, following a 48-hour rapid investigation. They reported that the variant had been sequenced in September and that a report was created into what was known during this period delivered as "advice to ministers" to avoid freedom of information requests.[6] In December 2020 Hancock and his media advisor Damon Poole discuss when to "deploy" information about a new variant and its likely effect on the right-wing press, behaviour change among the public, and London mayor Sadiq Khan. In January 2021, secretary to the prime minister, Simon Case, said that fear and guilt were vital factor in messaging.[4][5]

The introduction of face masks in schools during the COVID-19 pandemic took place after then-prime minister Boris Johnson was told it was "not worth an argument" with the then-First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon, who had implemented the policy, despite then-chief medical officer saying there were no very strong reasons to implement masking.[7]

The Telegraph reported that in November 2020, Chris Whitty and other government advisors were in favour of trialing five days of COVID testing as an alternative to 14-days of self-isolation for those who had come into contact with a person infected with COVID-19. The Telegraph reported that Hancock disagreed with this policy because it appeared like a loosening of rules and would suggest that the government had been wrong.[8] When interviewed about the matter on GB News, Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said that the matter was not briefed to the Cabinet, and that had he known he would have opposed the measures.[9]

Hancock instructed an aide to contact the Home Office to ask them to investigate if Nigel Farage[who?] had violated travel quarantine rules in response to a news story showing Farage at a pub in July 2020.[10] The Telegraph said that messages show Ministers and civil servants discussing "[getting] heavy with the police" to enforce lockdown measures with senior police officers being brought into Number 10 to be told to be stricter with the public.[11]

Care homes

[edit]

The Telegraph reported that in messages Hancock had said that one of the reasons for the discharge of hospital patients into care homes without testing in the spring of 2020 was that this testing would "get in the way" of targets of administering one hundred thousand COVID tests a day as part of the NHS testing program.[12] A spokesperson for Hancock said that the story spun about care homes was completely wrong and that the records show that Hancock had pushed for testing and that records related to this had been releasted to the COVID-19 inquiry.[13]

The Telegraph reported that 100 care homes said that they did not want COVID-19 tests when offered, including 10 that were worried that the tests would detect staff who had asymptomatic infections.[14]

Public health academic, Devi Sridar, writing in The Guardian contrasts her work based on data with Hancock's that she says appears to be based on politics, citing care home decision-making as an example.[15]

Lab leak theory

[edit]
See also: COVID-19 lab leak theory

The Telegraph reported that Hancock's book, Pandemic Diaries, was censored by the Cabinet Office to remove Hancock's opinion on the lab leak theory and its need for investigation. They report that Hancock had wanted to say that the Chinese government's explanation - that the virus being found near the Wuhan Institute of Virology was coincidental - "just doesn't fly", and that fear of the Chinese Government must not prevent research into what happened. Hancock was told that differing from this narrative would risk damaging national security.[16]

Articles about politics

[edit]

The Telegraph said that the messages show disagreements between the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rishi Sunak, and Hancock over policy. They said Hancock messaged Sunak, "Stop your 'allies' from briefing against me" and complained that the Treasury was briefing against Hancock's policies.[17] The Telegraph said there were disagreements about the wording of advice to businesses when restrictions were reduced in June 2020 and businesses were required to keep record of customers, with Sunak and Alok Sharma disagreeing with Hancock and Case.[17]

The Telegraph reported that there are messages between Allan Nixon, a parliamentary Advisor and Hancock discuss threatening to cancel projects in MPs constituencies if MPs did not support the local lockdown tiers legislation in November 2020. The Telegraph reported that as part of trying to stop MPs from rebelling the whips compiled a spreadsheet of 95 MPs who disagreed with this policy and the reasons for disagreeing with reasons given related to lack of parliamentary scrutinny, economic harm, harms to hospital, absence of cost benefit analysis and the policy being "unconservative".[18] MP Jake Berry, when interviewed about the matter said that the plan to threaten MPs was completely unacceptable and that he would have made details public if he was aware of it and was. MP James Daly said that he was appalled and disgusted that the disability hub in his constituency had been discussed as a way of coercing him.[19] Daly said that no such threat was made.[20]

The Telegraph reported that Hancock discussed removing Jeremy Farrar, from Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies because he publicly commented on the Government's COVID policy and decision to close Public Health England.[21]

People with released messages

[edit]

Messages reported about in the Lockdown Files include those by:

People mentioned in messages

Response

[edit]

Jonn Elledge in the New Statesman said that the initial revelations were unsurprising but confirmed what most people would suspect. He comments that readers should be appalled by aspects of governance revealed by the Lockdown Files such as the attitude revealed of the prime minister, ministers and surrounding media culture but that in light of previous government policies it is unsurprising.[30]

Writing in The Guardian, Zoe Williams said that the Lockdown Files are not the way to hold the Government to account, arguing that questions about funds were more important than the Telegraph's interest in the trade offs of lockdown, or whether Hancock broke lockdown rules.[31]

Andrew Roberts in The Spectator, said that the Lockdown Files will be a very useful source for historians comparing them to diaries. He said future who will probably kill a kinder assessment of the government.[32]

The material was reported in French newspaper, Les Echos, and German newspaper, Der Tagesspiegel.[33][34]

Lockdown and governance

[edit]

The Wall Street Journal said that the story revealed how easily emergency powers to protect people's health could bleed into personal ambition for the politicians involved and that science was contorted to impose the most onerous peacetime restrictions in history, explaining some of the demands of lockdown skeptics.[35]

Jonathan Sumption said that the Lockdown Files show that Hancock's actions during governance were driven by vanity. He said that the files indicates that Boris Johnson was aware of the totalitarian implications of restrictions but was manipulated by those around him who were concerned with public relations, lacking the "application" to get to the bottom of scientific evidence.[36]

Release of material

[edit]

Matt Hancock said that the messages were doctored and spun to support an anti-lockdown narrative. A spokesperson for Hancock said they had not been approached in advance of the publication of Lockdown Files stories.[37] Hancock argued that there was no public interest case for releasing the messages because the material had been released to the Inquiry.[38] A spokesperson for Hancock said that he was considering all legal options and accused Oakeshott of breaking a non-disclosure agreement.[13]

Elledge of the New Statesman comments on the fact that the Telegraph chose what to publish, arguing that the Telegraph had an anti-lockdown agenda. He gives Allison Pearson's comments in a Telegraph podcast, "Planet Normal", as evidence of this agenda.[30]

Ian Dunt, in the I newspaper, argued that Oakeshott was pursuing an anti-lockdown agenda and had violated a journalistic moral principle by releasing information about her source when hired by Hancock to work on his book.[39] Addressing the question of profession ethics of the release, David Banks writes in The Guardian, that the Editors Code of Practice places a moral responsibility on journalists to not disclose confidential sources, but notes that this rule tends to be more applied to people who fear being identified such as whistleblowers.[40]

Writing in The Spectator, Fraser Nelson argued that the British public had a right to know about the information in the Lockdown Files.[38] In the Telegraph, Julia Hartley-Brewer argued that "no journalist worth their salt" could disagree with the public interest case for the release of these files, suggesting that those criticising the release were motivated by their support for lockdown policies and that such releases were necessitated by journalists who failed to apply sufficient scrutiny to the decision-making and scientific discourse during the lockdown.[41] Andy Cowper, an editor at The British Medical Journal, said that the stories give a remarkable glimpse into how Hancock and his team conducted themselves in office and that Oakeshott had done a public service by bringing to our attention the low standard of governance during the pandemic.[42]

Sonia Sodha, in the Guardian, argued that there needs to rapid reviews of decision making during COVID-19 due to the length of the Covid-19 Inquiry. She said that the Telegraph's narrative could mask discussion of the trade offs of lockdown based on the values of citizens, and that delaying inquiry into the lockdown would allow "ideologues" to fill the gap created by the absence of review.[43]

Inquiry

[edit]
See also: UK Covid-19 Inquiry

Oakeshott said that the release of these messages was motivated by the slow pace of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry and her concern that the findings might be a "whitewash", citing public money being used in legal action to redact the names of officials.[3] Not directly addressing Oakshott, Heather Hallett the chair of the public inquiry said that it was unhelpful to compare the UK inquiry to other countries because of its broad terms of reference and statutary powers to obtain evidence. She said there would be "no whitewash".[44]

Labour MP Graham Stringer called for a short-term inquiry into Covid-19 in light of information contained in the lockdown files and the likely duration of the existing enquiry.[45]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Lockdown Files

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Lockdown Files consist of over 100,000 messages exchanged among government officials, including then-Health , during the from 2020 to 2021, which were obtained and published by The Telegraph in early 2023. These private communications, leaked by journalist who had access while collaborating on Hancock's pandemic memoir, revealed internal deliberations on lockdown policies, testing strategies, and public messaging that often diverged from official public narratives. The files exposed decisions driven by political considerations and behavioral incentives rather than unyielding adherence to scientific advice, such as Hancock's proposal to "frighten the pants off everyone" to boost compliance with restrictions and the rejection of Whitty's recommendation to test all patients entering care homes before discharge. They also highlighted tensions between Hancock and then-Chancellor over extensions and economic impacts, underscoring causal factors like amplification and administrative in prolonging measures despite emerging on their collateral harms. Controversies arose from these disclosures, including accusations of fear-mongering for policy enforcement and mismanagement in vulnerable settings, prompting defenses from officials who argued the messages were taken out of context amid high-stakes , though critics contended they evidenced systemic overreach unsupported by empirical proportionality. Publication of the files fueled debates on government transparency and the use of informal messaging for official business, leading to inquiries into practices and contributing to broader scrutiny of efficacy, where empirical reviews have since quantified substantial non-Covid excess deaths and economic costs attributable to restrictions.

Origins and

Background and Leak

The implemented its first national lockdown on March 23, 2020, in response to the escalating , with subsequent restrictions imposed throughout 2020 and 2021. , serving as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care from July 2018 to June 2021, was central to coordinating the government's pandemic response, including policy on testing, tracing, and protective measures for vulnerable populations. During this period, senior officials increasingly relied on for real-time decision-making and coordination, bypassing formal government channels despite guidance discouraging the use of personal messaging for official business. In preparing Hancock's memoir on the response, freelance journalist was granted access to his mobile phone to transcribe relevant exchanges. Oakeshott extracted and retained copies of over 100,000 messages sent between Hancock and various ministers, officials, scientific advisors, and other figures from March 2020 onward, covering discussions on lockdowns, care home policies, and strategies. In January 2023, Oakeshott disclosed these messages to , citing their public interest value in revealing informal governance practices during the crisis. The newspaper verified portions of the material and began publishing excerpts and analysis under the banner "The Lockdown Files" starting March 1, 2023, with initial revelations appearing in and subsequent daily installments. The leaks prompted scrutiny from the ongoing , which later examined the use of such communications and their implications for transparency and .

Initial Reporting by The Telegraph

The initial reporting on the Lockdown Files by The Telegraph began with the publication of leaked messages from former Health Secretary on 28 February 2023, revealing that Hancock had rejected advice from to test all hospital patients for before discharging them to care homes. These messages, part of a larger cache exceeding 100,000 exchanges involving Hancock and other senior officials, were provided to The Telegraph by journalist , who had obtained them while assisting Hancock with his pandemic memoir under a . On 1 March 2023, The Telegraph launched its serialized investigation titled "The Lockdown Files," dedicating the front page and multiple articles to analyzing the messages, which spanned from early through the height of the . The reporting highlighted informal decision-making processes, including Hancock's discussions on prioritizing care home protections and managing public messaging, with initial pieces focusing on discrepancies between private communications and public policy announcements. Oakeshott justified sharing the messages publicly to prevent a potential "" in official inquiries, arguing that the full context was essential for accountability. Hancock responded by labeling the leak a "massive ," emphasizing that the messages were intended for the Inquiry and accusing Oakeshott of breaching trust, while defending the government's actions as based on the best available scientific advice at the time. The Telegraph's investigations editor, Claire Newell, led the verification and contextualization efforts, cross-referencing messages with official records to underscore patterns in governance, such as reliance on for high-level coordination outside formal channels. The series prompted immediate scrutiny from and the public, setting the stage for broader revelations about policy formulation.

Content of the Messages

Care Homes and Early Pandemic Policies

Leaked WhatsApp messages from the Lockdown Files revealed that government policy in March 2020 directed the discharge of hospital patients to care homes without requiring , prioritizing the alleviation of pressures amid surging cases. This approach, outlined in NHS guidance on 17 March 2020, facilitated the rapid transfer of up to 15,000 patients by late March, many potentially infectious, into facilities housing frail elderly residents with high comorbidity rates. Officials, including Health Secretary , acknowledged the inherent risks but proceeded due to limited testing capacity, which stood at around 10,000 tests per day in early March, far below the needs for comprehensive screening. The files exposed how Hancock rejected advice from Chief Medical Officer Sir Chris Whitty for mandatory testing of all individuals entering care homes, with Whitty messaging as early as 30 March 2020 that "we should be testing all going into care homes" to mitigate transmission. Hancock's responses indicated prioritization of hospital safeguards over care home protections, stating in messages that "the NHS has the right plan" despite warnings, and defending the policy retrospectively as the "least worst decision" to prevent broader system collapse. This stance persisted even as data emerged showing care homes accounting for approximately 29% of England's deaths by June 2020, with 18,500 residents succumbing between March and June amid of over 28,000. Early pandemic policies compounded vulnerabilities through additional measures, such as widespread issuance of do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation (DNACPR) orders without individual assessments, often applied blanket-style to care home populations deemed high-risk. Messages indicated awareness among officials of these practices but limited intervention, reflecting a triage mentality that deprioritized amid ventilator shortages and ICU constraints. In April 2020, Hancock messaged aides about shielding care homes but noted practical failures, with infections traced directly to hospital discharges in multiple outbreaks. A 2022 High Court ruling deemed the discharge guidance unlawful, finding it failed to adequately assess or mitigate transmission risks to care home residents, a vulnerability exacerbated by policies restricting visitor access and isolating symptomatic cases without isolation capacity. Hancock disputed interpretations of the leaked messages as "distorted," claiming they ignored contextual constraints like testing shortages, though the files underscored a causal chain from untested transfers to disproportionate care home mortality, representing over 40% of the initial wave deaths. These revelations highlighted trade-offs in early decision-making, where empirical pressures on led to foreseeable but unmitigated harms in long-term settings.

Strategies for Public Compliance

Leaked WhatsApp messages from Health Secretary revealed discussions on leveraging fear to promote adherence to restrictions. In one exchange, Hancock proposed to an aide that officials should "frighten the pants off everyone" regarding the emerging variant of the virus, aiming to shock the public into compliance with evolving lockdown rules. This approach, termed "Project Fear" in reporting, involved strategizing the timing and emphasis of variant announcements to maximize behavioral impact, with Hancock conferring on how to "deploy" such news effectively. Messages indicated that fear and guilt were regarded as essential mechanisms for enforcing measures like mandates and protocols. For instance, officials explored amplifying perceptions of risk from the variant—initially estimated to be up to 70% more transmissible—to counteract waning public vigilance amid repeated policy shifts. Hancock's communications emphasized psychological tactics over purely scientific communication, prioritizing compliance through heightened alarm rather than balanced . These strategies aligned with broader behavioral insights employed during the , where internal deliberations acknowledged the role of "scaring people" to sustain rule-following, as evidenced in related advisory group minutes integrated into the leaked exchanges. Critics, including civil servants, later described such methods as veering into unprofessional territory, though proponents within viewed them as pragmatic responses to perceived non-compliance risks. The revelations prompted parliamentary , with some MPs condemning the tactics as a form of "" that eroded in health authorities.

Dismissal of Alternative Hypotheses

The messages from the Lockdown Files demonstrate that senior officials, including Health Secretary and Chief Scientific Adviser , largely dismissed alternative pandemic strategies such as or less stringent measures, prioritizing lockdown enforcement amid internal acknowledgments of uncertainties. Early discussions in March 2020 reflected an initial pivot away from after Imperial College modeling projected up to 510,000 deaths without suppression, leading to the adoption of lockdowns without evident exploration of hybrid approaches in subsequent exchanges. Vallance privately expressed doubts about achieving naturally, stating it would require "quite a lot of " and noting the absence of , yet the messages show no serious deliberation of revisiting this or similar options as evidence of viral dynamics evolved. When Prime Minister shared a Spectator article advocating benefits, responded dismissively, describing it as "a very odd article" and emphasizing the risks, underscoring an internal culture resistant to external hypotheses challenging the suppression narrative. This stance extended to broader alternatives, including focused protection for vulnerable groups as later proposed in the ; messages reveal officials instead focused on narrative control, with Hancock's team coordinating with media to amplify threats and vilify dissenters, effectively sidelining empirical debates on targeted protections over blanket restrictions. Warnings about lockdown collateral damage—such as surges in child illnesses and healthcare backlogs—were received but overridden, with decisions like delaying reopenings justified by perceived rather than comparative data from low-restriction models like Sweden's. Post-pandemic analyses, informed by the files' revelations, highlight Sweden's lower (3.9% from 2020-2022 versus the 's higher rate), suggesting UK officials' dismissal of such approaches may have foregone viable hypotheses favoring voluntary compliance and sectoral protections. However, the messages indicate these choices were driven by fear of political backlash, as cautioned Johnson of lockdown's "terrible" consequences yet saw no policy shift toward alternatives.

Governance and Decision-Making

Informal Communication Practices

During the , government officials extensively utilized for official communications, shifting from traditional formal channels due to the demands of remote working and rapid decision-making. This practice enabled real-time exchanges among ministers, advisors, and scientific experts, often in group chats that included figures such as Health Secretary , Cabinet Secretary , Chief Medical Officer , and Chief Scientific Adviser . Such informal methods facilitated discussions on critical policies, including measures and testing strategies, but frequently bypassed official record-keeping systems required for transparency and . The Lockdown Files, comprising over 100,000 leaked messages primarily from Hancock's exchanges between 2020 and 2021, exemplify this reliance on ephemeral messaging. Messages revealed candid policy deliberations, such as Hancock's February 2021 instruction to aides to prioritize discharges to care homes without adequate testing, conducted via private threads rather than documented emails or minutes. Officials formed ad-hoc groups for specific topics, like vaccine prioritization or public messaging on compliance, allowing swift coordination but complicating subsequent as conversations were not automatically archived in systems. Government guidance prior to and during the discouraged the use of non-corporate platforms like for substantive official business, emphasizing retention for requests and audits. However, enforcement was lax amid the crisis, with communications often occurring on personal devices. Post-pandemic inquiries highlighted instances where messages were routinely deleted; for example, in related practices, officials were instructed to delete messages daily to manage data volume, a approach echoed in concerns over ministerial auto-delete functions activated to circumvent disclosure rules. Hancock himself testified to the in January 2024 that he did not personally delete messages, though the leaks demonstrated a broader cultural acceptance of ephemerality to avoid formal trails. This informal ecosystem raised accountability issues, as evidenced by the COVID-19 Inquiry's legal battles to obtain messages, culminating in a July 2023 ruling mandating disclosure despite government claims of unrecoverable data. In response, March 2023 guidance reiterated restrictions on private apps for sensitive discussions, prohibiting their use for and requiring official channels for decisions. The practices underscored a tension between operational speed and norms, with the leaks providing unprecedented insight into unfiltered deliberations otherwise shielded from public view.

Interactions with Advisors and Media

The messages exchanged by Health Secretary demonstrate extensive informal consultations with scientific advisors, often diverging from their recommendations in favor of operational or political priorities. In April 2020, advised Hancock to implement testing for all patients entering care homes to mitigate transmission risks, emphasizing that "all residents going into care homes should be tested" regardless of symptoms; however, Hancock rejected this, arguing that resources were insufficient and prioritizing discharges without universal testing. Similarly, in August 2020, amid discussions on self-isolation rules, Whitty and other advisors highlighted the disproportionate impact of the 14-day quarantine period on certain groups, prompting Hancock to explore shorter alternatives like seven days with testing, though implementation lagged due to logistical challenges. Interactions with revealed a candid, at times irreverent dynamic influencing strategies. On March 19, 2020, Hancock urged Case to "get heavy with " to ensure compliance with emerging measures, reflecting concerns over voluntary adherence. Case's messages to Hancock included dismissive remarks, such as labeling the hotel for travelers as "hilarious and simply unbelievable," underscoring internal toward certain measures despite public . These exchanges, spanning early 2020, highlight a reliance on digital communication over formal channels, with Case coordinating cross-departmental responses to Hancock's directives. Hancock's communications with media advisors emphasized narrative control and public , integrating polling data into alongside advisor input. In June , Hancock's team proposed using focus groups to gauge public support for additional restrictions, contrasting with Boris Johnson's polling-driven decision to proceed with pub reopenings. Media adviser Damon frequently briefed Hancock on press coverage and political fallout, such as on December 13, , alerting him to Conservative MPs' concerns over new variant fears to preempt backlash. Another media aide, Nkoju-Goodwin, warned Hancock in early about potential scrutiny over personal conduct amid ongoing pandemic handling, illustrating proactive damage control efforts. These interactions reveal how media strategy often shaped policy announcements, with advisors like Poole embedded in real-time crisis response to align messaging with enforcement goals.

Political Maneuvering

The Lockdown Files expose how political imperatives shaped responses, often prioritizing narrative control and blame avoidance over unfiltered evidence. Messages indicate that Health Secretary advocated for amplifying public fear to secure adherence to restrictions, messaging an aide on an unspecified early date to "frighten the pants off everyone" with coordinated government communications. This approach aimed to counter potential public complacency, reflecting a strategy where perceived political necessity for visible action trumped calibrated , as was discarded partly due to messaging challenges rather than solely epidemiological grounds. Internal tensions highlighted political maneuvering within the government, particularly between Hancock and , whose economic cautions clashed with Hancock's push for stringent measures. WhatsApp exchanges revealed Hancock and expressing frustration over Sunak's reluctance to endorse tactics or fully align on extensions, with Case noting Sunak's positions complicated unified policy fronts. These disagreements underscored efforts to sidelined fiscal realism in favor of health-dominated optics, contributing to decisions like the scheme's launch amid lockdowns, which Sunak championed as an economic counterbalance despite internal resistance. To enforce compliance at local and parliamentary levels, Hancock employed leverage tactics, including considerations to withdraw support for key initiatives ahead of potential Conservative rebellions on COVID regulations. Leaked messages from around March 2021 show Hancock contemplating yanking funding or project backing to pressure MPs into supporting votes on restrictions, illustrating intra-party to maintain legislative majorities for politically sensitive policies. Such maneuvers prioritized short-term political survival over broader deliberation, as evidenced by ad hoc deliberations under Prime Minister that supplanted formal cabinet processes.

Key Individuals Involved

Matt Hancock's Role

Matt held the position of UK for from July 2018 to June 2021, overseeing the government's response to the , including the implementation of lockdowns and related public health measures. The Lockdown Files, comprising over 100,000 of his WhatsApp messages leaked to and published by starting in February 2023, position him as the central figure in informal pandemic decision-making. These exchanges, spanning early 2020 to mid-2021, reveal Hancock's direct involvement in shaping policies on testing, care home protections, and public messaging strategies. Hancock's messages demonstrate his rejection of expert advice on care home safeguards; on April 7, 2020, recommended testing all hospital patients entering care homes for , but Hancock opted for targeted testing only for symptomatic cases, citing capacity constraints, a choice later associated with elevated death rates among elderly residents. In March 2020 discussions, he coordinated hospital discharges to care homes without universal testing to free up NHS beds, prioritizing overall system capacity over isolated facility risks. Hancock also expressed uncertainty about prevailing rules, as in a September 2020 message asking an advisor to clarify "what EXACTLY the rules are" on that date, underscoring ad hoc governance. To bolster public adherence to restrictions, Hancock advocated amplifying fear in communications; on March 12, 2020, he messaged aide Damon Poole suggesting they needed to "frighten the pants off everyone" regarding COVID threats to drive compliance with guidance. Messages further show his push for rapid testing expansions, including a May 2020 effort to hit a daily tests target amid internal debates on school reopenings and enforcement. Hancock's informal use with figures like and officials facilitated quick policy iterations but raised concerns over transparency and record-keeping, as these channels evaded official oversight. The files portray Hancock engaging in political maneuvering, such as mocking hotel occupants in exchanges with junior health minister in February 2021, reflecting a casual tone amid strict public mandates. He defended some decisions during subsequent COVID inquiries, attributing care home outcomes to broader epidemiological pressures rather than policy flaws, though the messages provide primary evidence of trade-offs made under uncertainty. Overall, Hancock's role highlights a reliance on behavioral nudges and resource prioritization, with the leaks prompting scrutiny of accountability in high-stakes administration.

Other Officials and Contributors

, serving as from 2020, frequently messaged during the , revealing informal and candid exchanges that contrasted with official protocols. In one exchange on February 1, 2021, Case described the government's hotel quarantine policy as "hilarious," noting that 149 individuals had been instructed to isolate in designated hotels upon return from high-risk countries, highlighting perceived absurdities in enforcement. These messages also showed Case advising Hancock on bolstering public compliance through "trusted voices" for isolation policies, emphasizing the need for convincing narratives over strict mandates. Case's communications underscored a reliance on for high-level , bypassing formal channels and raising questions about accountability in governance. Chris Whitty, England's , provided scientific input reflected in the leaked messages, including recommendations on care home protections early in the . On April 6, 2020, Whitty advised Hancock to implement testing for all patients discharged to care homes to mitigate virus transmission risks, a measure Hancock reportedly overruled in favor of prioritizing testing capacity for community surveillance. This decision contributed to elevated mortality rates in care settings, with over 30,000 deaths recorded by mid-2020, as later analyses linked untested discharges to outbreaks. Whitty's messages also detailed ongoing scientific deliberations, such as debates over mask efficacy and extensions, where his cautious stance often aligned with precautionary measures despite emerging data on disproportionate harms. Rishi Sunak, then , featured in messages exchanged between Hancock and Case, exposing tensions over fiscal responses to . On October 24, 2020, amid discussions of a potential second national , Sunak advocated for targeted regional measures over blanket restrictions, citing economic devastation from prolonged closures that had already pushed claims to 1.7 million by November 2020. Hancock and Case expressed private frustrations with Sunak's resistance, with Case noting in messages that Sunak's positions complicated unified cabinet messaging. These exchanges illustrated divergent priorities, with Sunak emphasizing cost-benefit analyses against health officials' focus on suppression, influencing debates that led to the eventual scheme in August 2020, which aimed to stimulate recovery but drew criticism for potentially accelerating transmission. Other contributors, including special advisers like Damon Poole, Hancock's aide, appeared in group chats coordinating media narratives and policy spin. Poole's messages on March 12, 2020, urged amplifying "fear" to ensure public adherence to , aligning with broader strategies documented across the files. These informal inputs from aides and officials highlighted a pattern of ad-hoc , where scientific, economic, and political considerations were weighed through unminuted digital communications rather than structured processes.

Revelations on Policy Effectiveness

Lockdown Justifications and Outcomes

The initial justifications for UK lockdowns, as articulated by officials including Health Secretary Matt Hancock, centered on preventing the National Health Service (NHS) from being overwhelmed and averting projected mass fatalities based on epidemiological models from Imperial College London, which estimated up to 510,000 deaths without intervention in the first wave. However, leaked WhatsApp messages from the Lockdown Files revealed that compliance strategies relied heavily on amplifying public fear rather than solely on scientific evidence, with Hancock advising aides on 25 September 2020 to "frighten the pants off everyone" regarding the emerging Kent variant to drive adherence to restrictions. Similarly, messages indicated that decisions to extend or intensify measures, such as school closures, were influenced by polling data and media optics over clinical advice, as seen in June 2020 discussions where Prime Minister Boris Johnson delayed easing based on focus group feedback rather than SAGE recommendations. These communications exposed an internal recognition of trade-offs, including deliberate acceptance of economic disruption to prioritize capacity; Hancock expressed pride in 2020 for "crashing the " to protect the NHS, framing it as a necessary despite awareness of broader harms. Officials also dismissed alternatives like focused for vulnerable groups, with messages showing swift rejection of approaches after initial consideration, prioritizing blanket measures amid political pressures. Empirical outcomes of the UK's three national lockdowns (March 2020, November 2020–March 2021, and January 2021) showed limited mortality reduction relative to costs. A 2024 meta-analysis of spring 2020 lockdowns across multiple countries, including the UK, found they reduced COVID-19 mortality by only about 0.2 percentage points on average, with effects waning over time due to behavioral fatigue and enforcement challenges. UK excess deaths totaled approximately 230,000 from March 2020 to December 2022, exceeding many European peers with less stringent measures, such as Sweden, which had comparable per capita rates despite avoiding full lockdowns. Non-COVID excess mortality rose significantly during restrictions, linked to delayed care and mental health deterioration, with studies estimating 20,000–30,000 additional deaths from cardiovascular and other causes due to NHS backlogs. Economically, the lockdowns induced a 9.8% GDP contraction in 2020—the deepest since records began—costing an estimated £370 billion in direct fiscal support and lost output, far exceeding benefits from averted deaths valued at full . A cost-benefit analysis indicated that even under optimistic mortality avoidance scenarios, expenses were 40% higher than gains, with long-term scarring including elevated and a 5–10% drop in growth projections. impacts were pronounced, with surveys reporting a 40% increase in probable depression cases among adults by mid-2021, particularly affecting children and low-income groups through school closures that disrupted for 1.5 million pupils. These outcomes, as illuminated by the Files, underscored officials' foreknowledge of collateral damages, including care home policies that prioritized discharges without adequate testing, contributing to 20,000–30,000 excess deaths in those settings early in the .

Vaccine Rollout and Treatment Decisions

The Lockdown Files disclosed that former Health Secretary regarded the acceleration of the rollout as a personal success, messaging aides on December 8, 2020, to describe the expansion of eligibility to individuals under 55—contrary to initial prioritization for the elderly and vulnerable—as a "Hancock triumph". This move followed regulatory approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine earlier that week, enabling the to administer over 1 million doses by mid-December 2020, ahead of many European nations. Hancock expressed anxiety over public attribution, urging officials to emphasize his role in securing and deploying supplies amid supply chain challenges. Messages further revealed Hancock's private doubts about post-rollout safety surveillance, with a February 2021 exchange highlighting concerns that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency's (MHRA) Yellow Card reporting system for adverse events was "shonky" and potentially unreliable for detecting issues at scale. By then, the national rollout had administered tens of millions of doses, yet Hancock pressed for enhanced monitoring amid emerging reports of rare side effects like blood clots linked to the , which prompted temporary pauses in some countries. These revelations underscore a tension between rapid deployment—driven by Hancock's advocacy for emergency authorizations—and apprehensions over the robustness of . On treatment protocols, the files offer limited direct insight but illustrate a strategic pivot toward as the dominant intervention, with Hancock coordinating efforts to integrate jabs into care home and settings while hospital treatments remained focused on supportive care and later-adopted options like dexamethasone, approved for severe cases in June 2020 based on RECOVERY trial data showing a 30% mortality reduction in ventilated patients. Discussions emphasized vaccine prioritization over exploratory repurposed drugs, reflecting official guidance that dismissed unproven therapies amid gaps, though no explicit suppression of alternatives like —halted globally after flawed studies—or appears in the leaked exchanges. This approach aligned with SAGE advice favoring randomized controlled trials, but critics have argued it delayed consideration of outpatient regimens potentially amenable to early use.

Responses and Aftermath

Government and Official Reactions

Former Health Secretary responded to the publication of the Lockdown Files on March 1, 2023, by asserting that the leaked messages had been "doctored" and selectively presented to advance an "anti-lockdown agenda." He described the leak as a "massive betrayal and breach of trust" by journalist , who had been granted access to the messages under non-disclosure terms while assisting with his memoir. Hancock apologized for the impact on individuals named in the messages but maintained that the disclosures did not alter his view of the decisions taken, emphasizing that they were made with the best available information at the time. Hancock's spokesperson criticized The Telegraph's investigation as "outrageous" and indicated consideration of legal action against the leak. The government did not issue a formal collective statement repudiating the revelations but continued to direct scrutiny toward the ongoing , where the messages were submitted as evidence. Prime Minister , during on March 1, 2023, avoided direct engagement with the leaks when questioned by opposition leader , instead reiterating support for the COVID inquiry's timeline. Sunak's prior messages within the files highlighted tensions with Hancock, including concerns over harms, but no specific post-publication rebuttal from Sunak emerged challenging the authenticity of the communications. Cabinet Secretary Simon Case and Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty, featured in the exchanges, did not publicly contest the veracity of the leaked content, though government guidance on official digital communications faced renewed scrutiny, prompting discussions on potential shifts away from informal messaging to avoid future exposures. Overall, reactions prioritized defending past actions amid process rather than acknowledging flaws exposed by the files.

Media and Public Discourse

The Lockdown Files, consisting of over 100,000 messages leaked to and first published on March 1, 2023, prompted varied media responses, with The Telegraph leading extensive coverage that revealed officials' discussions on using fear to enforce compliance and sidelining alternative policies like the . Other outlets, including the and , reported specific revelations such as Health Secretary Matt Hancock's rejection of testing all hospital patients entering care homes despite advice from Chris , but often framed them within defenses of pandemic decision-making under uncertainty. Hancock dismissed the disclosures as a "partial, biased account to suit an anti-lockdown agenda," accusing Isabel of betrayal for sharing messages obtained during her work on his pandemic memoir. Public discourse intensified scrutiny of media's prior amplification of government narratives, with commentators noting that mainstream outlets had largely endorsed lockdowns and fear-based messaging without equivalent examination of dissenting scientific views or economic costs at the time. Oakeshott justified the leak by citing public interest, highlighting reader responses detailing personal harms like suicides linked to isolation policies, which underscored a broader societal reckoning absent from initial coverage. Independent analyses, such as in Reason magazine, portrayed the files as exposing "sordid thinking" behind restrictions, fueling debates on accountability and contributing to demands for fuller inquiries into policy motivations. The revelations also spotlighted tensions in journalistic ethics and source handling, as the affirmed the files' value in learning from COVID responses while cautioning on data protection breaches. In public forums and podcasts, discussions evolved to critique institutional biases, with skeptics arguing that left-leaning media's alignment with pro-lockdown stances had delayed scrutiny of evidence like Sweden's lighter-touch approach, which showed comparable outcomes without stringent measures. This shift in discourse challenged the consensus on lockdowns' necessity, prompting calls for transparency in future crises and highlighting how initial media deference may have hindered of policy trade-offs.

Implications for COVID Inquiries

The Lockdown Files, published by beginning on 1 March 2023, intersected with the COVID-19 Inquiry's early evidence-gathering phase, which had commenced public hearings in June 2022 under chair Baroness Heather Hallett. The leaks comprised over 100,000 messages exchanged primarily between former Health Secretary and other officials from February 2020 to April 2021, revealing private deliberations on enforcement, care home discharges, and testing priorities that often diverged from contemporaneous public rationales. These disclosures fueled arguments that the inquiry's reliance on curated submissions risked incomplete historical reconstruction, as participants like had testified under in June 2023 without initially referencing the full candor of such informal exchanges. Hancock characterized the leaks as a "massive " that circumvented 's structured process, insisting the latter remained the proper forum for contextual analysis rather than selective excerpts. Conversely, leaker contended the publication addressed 's anticipated multi-year duration—potentially extending beyond 2026—and apprehensions of a "colossal ," given participants' incentives to align narratives with institutional defenses. Hallett rebutted these claims on 1 March 2023, affirming 's independence and statutory powers to summon evidence, while decrying the leaks as disruptive to orderly examination. Bereaved families, including the Scottish COVID Bereaved group, urged to integrate the files' contents, viewing them as vital to probing systemic failures in decision-making transparency. The files illuminated evidentiary challenges inherent to , particularly the government's practice of deleting messages after 30 days per guidance, which later deemed obstructive in its October 2023 hearings on core response. Messages evidenced pragmatic trade-offs, such as prioritizing hospital bed clearance by discharging untested COVID-positive patients to care homes—despite internal acknowledgments of heightened risks—to avert NHS overload, a Hancock publicly framed as precautionary. This discrepancy prompted cross-examination discrepancies during Hancock's , where he maintained policies followed scientific advice, yet private exchanges suggested fear-driven improvisations over data-led calibration. The inquiry subsequently demanded comprehensive ministerial digital records, exposing how unarchived communications could skew findings toward sanitized accounts, as corroborated by interim reports critiquing "groupthink" in preparedness. Broader ramifications extended to procedural reforms, with the files catalyzing parliamentary scrutiny and reinforcing arguments for inquiries to mandate real-time preservation of non-official channels, amid revelations that over 5 million government-held COVID-related messages were withheld or destroyed. Critics, including legal scholars, highlighted the leaks' role in circumventing self-serving redactions, though official responses emphasized the inquiry's evolving modules—such as those on and economic impacts—would assimilate analogous evidence without endorsing unauthorized disclosures. Ultimately, the episode underscored tensions between institutional gatekeeping and external transparency mechanisms, potentially eroding in the inquiry's capacity to deliver unvarnished causal insights into causalities, estimated at excess deaths beyond direct viral tolls.

Criticisms and Controversies

Ethical and Accountability Issues

The Lockdown Files exposed ethical lapses in record-keeping and transparency, as senior officials, including Matt Hancock, routinely deleted WhatsApp messages discussing critical COVID-19 policies, undermining post-pandemic accountability. Hancock provided over 100,000 messages to journalist Isabel Oakeshott under a non-disclosure agreement for his memoir, yet resisted full disclosure to the UK COVID-19 Inquiry, citing exemptions for informal communications; this selective approach fueled accusations of evading scrutiny. The Information Commissioner's Office warned that widespread use of WhatsApp in Whitehall posed transparency risks, as such platforms bypassed official archiving requirements, complicating verification of decision-making processes. Accountability issues intensified with revelations that Hancock rejected Whitty's advice to test all hospital patients entering care homes in April 2020, prioritizing discharge targets amid bed shortages; messages indicated Hancock viewed testing as a delay, stating, "The guidance was to test but not to require a negative test to move," despite Whitty's push for universal testing to curb outbreaks in vulnerable settings. This policy correlated with over 25,000 care home deaths in the first wave, prompting bereaved families to criticize Hancock's inquiry testimony as "full of excuses and completely devoid of ." Hancock disputed interpretations of the messages as "doctored to create a false story," but the files suggested decisions favored operational metrics over precautionary measures. Broader ethical concerns arose from messages revealing a focus on narrative control, such as Hancock's push to "use new variant of " for compliance and admissions of prioritizing testing targets over border controls, raising questions about whether was subordinated to political optics. Critics, including opposition figures, called for criminal investigations into Hancock's handling of care homes, arguing that ignoring expert advice breached duties to protect the elderly. The government's resistance to releasing unredacted messages to the inquiry further eroded trust, with the invoking exemptions, delaying full examination of leadership failures. These incidents underscored systemic gaps, where informal channels obscured causal links between policy choices and exceeding 200,000 by mid-2023.

Broader Impacts on Society and Economy

The revelations in the Lockdown Files, comprising leaked messages from Health Secretary and other officials between 2020 and 2021, underscored internal acknowledgments of lockdown-induced economic disruptions, including business closures and fiscal strains, even as policies were extended. These disclosures fueled retrospective analyses showing that the 's GDP contracted by 26% in April 2020 compared to February, with cumulative losses estimated at £250 billion for 2020-2021 relative to pre-pandemic trends. schemes mitigated overt to 4.8% in mid-2020, but masked and long-term scarring, particularly in and retail sectors where permanent closures exceeded 20% in some regions. Cost-benefit studies post-revelations consistently indicated that lockdown expenditures and indirect harms outweighed mortality reductions; one analysis found the minimum costs 40% exceeded the maximum benefits from averting deaths at full . A 2023 study described the first lockdown's benefits as a "drop in the bucket" against collateral economic damages, including £370 billion in public spending on support measures. Messages revealing officials' focus on "scaring the public" with worst-case projections, despite data suggesting thresholds lower than initially modeled, amplified critiques that policies ignored trade-offs like sustained and debt-to-GDP ratios surpassing 100%. Socially, the files exposed awareness of non-pharmaceutical interventions' toll on vulnerable groups, yet proceeded with measures correlating to a rise in prevalence from 19.1% pre-pandemic to 30.6% during initial lockdowns. Excess non-COVID deaths climbed, with estimates of up to 200,000 avoidable fatalities from delayed treatments and care disruptions by 2021. Educational losses affected millions, with closures linked to widened attainment gaps and crises, including ninefold higher COVID mortality risks for those with learning disabilities during peaks. The disclosures intensified debates on institutional priorities, revealing tensions between suppression goals and evidenced harms like reduced and , disproportionately burdening low-income and mentally ill populations.

Challenges to Official Narratives

The Lockdown Files, comprising over 100,000 messages exchanged among government officials including Health Secretary during the , exposed inconsistencies between private deliberations and public statements on lockdown policies. These leaks, published by in March 2023, revealed tactics aimed at maximizing public compliance through heightened fear rather than solely evidence-based communication, challenging the official narrative that restrictions followed transparent, scientific guidance. Hancock messaged an aide on October 14, 2020, suggesting they needed to "frighten the pants off everyone" about the new strain to encourage adherence to rules, a strategy later described as "Project Fear" internally. This approach contradicted public assurances that messaging was calibrated to reflect epidemiological data without undue alarmism. Further discrepancies emerged regarding care home protections, where officials privately acknowledged risks but prioritized broader testing targets over targeted screening for vulnerable residents. Hancock was advised in April 2020 to test all care home patients leaving hospitals, yet messages indicated concerns that such measures could impede national testing goals, leading to delayed implementation despite public claims of prioritizing the elderly. Hancock disputed interpretations of these messages as rejecting advice, asserting they were taken out of context, but the exchanges highlighted a tension between stated commitments to safeguard care homes and operational trade-offs. Similarly, private discussions admitted the "potentially massive impact" of lockdowns on society was underappreciated, yet policies proceeded without full mitigation planning, undermining narratives of proportionate, harm-minimizing responses. The files also documented informal decision-making via that bypassed formal cabinet processes, including on mask mandates and isolation rules, fostering perceptions of ad-hoc governance rather than rigorous protocol. Officials like Hancock sought to "guarantee" positive media coverage for policy announcements, revealing a focus on narrative control over unvarnished data presentation. These revelations prompted calls for their inclusion in the UK Inquiry as evidence of systemic opacity, with inquiry modules later critiquing the failure to weigh non-COVID harms adequately, thus validating challenges to the depiction of lockdowns as unequivocally evidence-driven necessities.

References

  1. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/lockdown-files/
  2. https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p583
  3. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/matt-hancock-lockdown-files-covid-10-things-learnt/
  4. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64848106
  5. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lockdown-files-are-a-historians-dream/
  6. https://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2020/march/update-on-coronavirus-24-march-2020/
  7. https://www.gov.uk/government/people/matthew-hancock
  8. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-centre/the-lockdown-files-will-help-us-learn-from-the-experience-of-covid/
  9. https://news.sky.com/story/how-have-matt-hancocks-whatsapp-messages-been-leaked-and-what-is-a-non-disclosure-agreement-12822797
  10. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64825476
  11. https://theweek.com/news/politics/959909/matt-hancock-and-the-lockdown-files-whats-happening-with-the-covid-inquiry
  12. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/28/lockdown-files-matt-hancock-whatsapp-whitty-care-homes-covid/
  13. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/01/matt-hancock-latest-news-covid-whatsapp-groups-lockdown-care/
  14. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/02/why-telegraph-revealed-matt-hancocks-whatsapp-messages-lockdown/
  15. https://www.politico.eu/article/matt-hancock-uk-coronavirus-accuses-whatsapp-leaker-of-massive-betrayal/
  16. https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/11nm0e7/im_claire_newell_the_telegraphs_investigations/
  17. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-61227709
  18. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/02/hancock-discharging-patient-care-homes-least-worst-decision/
  19. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp904053024o
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7461496/
  21. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64807127
  22. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/project-fear-covid-lockdown-files-matt-hancock-whatsapp/
  23. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/project-fear-covid-variant-lockdown-matt-hancock-whatsapp/
  24. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/lockdown-files-united-kingdom-covid-pandemic-response/
  25. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/06/simon-cases-whatsapps-with-hancock-unprofessional-say-ex-civil-servants
  26. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/05/project-fears-psychological-warfare-must-never-repeated-say/
  27. https://www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/the-lockdown-files-what-we-learnt-about-team-covid-vqf5zx9h2
  28. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/bbc-conspired-campaign-fear-kept-britain-locked/
  29. https://reason.com/2023/03/20/britains-lockdown-files-reveal-the-sordid-thinking-behind-pandemic-policy/
  30. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/18/evidence-lockdowns-kill-people-lock-kill/
  31. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-67275967
  32. https://consoc.org.uk/government-by-whatsapp/
  33. https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/22/government-work-often-done-on-instant-messages-during-covid-says-top-official
  34. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/28/lockdown-files-whatsapp-messages-government-covid-response/
  35. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/01/matt-hancock-what-do-leaked-whatsapp-messages-reveal-covid
  36. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64823096
  37. https://www.gov.scot/publications/independent-review-scottish-governments-use-mobile-messaging-apps-non-corporate-technology/pages/6/
  38. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/07/ministers-activating-auto-delete-whatsapp-messages/
  39. https://ukcovid19inquiry.dracos.co.uk/module-2A/2024-01-29/
  40. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-65122288
  41. https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-government-must-hand-over-whatsapp-messages-covid-inquiry-court-rules-2023-07-06/
  42. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/05/chris-whitty-matt-hancock-covid-isolation-pingdemic-whatsapp/
  43. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/02/matt-hancock-whatsapp-messages-simon-case-police-covid-lockdown
  44. https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-the-lockdown-files-covid-london-parliament-mp-telegraph-whatsapp-message-fear-virus-policy-new-strain-54c15c4f
  45. https://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-inquiry-live-matt-hancock-040501839.html
  46. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/03/whatsapp-messages-lockdown-rishi-sunak-matt-hancock-simon-case/
  47. https://www.politico.eu/article/matt-hancock-phone-text-messages-rishi-sunak-covid-coronavirus-lockdown-boris-johnson/
  48. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/28/government-whatsapp-covid-rules-care-homes/
  49. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/key-revelations-leak-hancock-whatsapps-113037028.html
  50. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64831240
  51. https://apnews.com/article/uk-covid-inquiry-matt-hancock-a5c6a465f41ef6ea430d557888138d6d
  52. https://jerseyeveningpost.com/morenews/uknews/2023/03/02/key-revelations-from-leak-of-hancock-whatsapps/
  53. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/helen-whately-daily-telegraph-chris-whitty-isabel-oakeshott-covid-b2292742.html
  54. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-sunak-really-said-about-lockdown/
  55. https://news.sky.com/story/five-key-exchanges-from-matt-hancocks-leaked-trove-of-whatsapp-messages-12822777
  56. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11127-024-01216-7
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7435525/
  58. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/05/matt-hancock-triumph-covid-vaccine-lockdown-files-whatsapp/
  59. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/09/matt-hancock-feared-covid-vaccine-warning-systems-shonky/
  60. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/01/matt-hancock-whatsapp-leaks-doctored-anti-lockdown-agenda/
  61. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/02/matt-hancock-calls-isabel-oakeshott-whatsapp-messages-leak-massive-betrayal
  62. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64818969
  63. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUIFmZlZf9M
  64. https://theweek.com/news/politics/959940/will-the-lockdown-files-change-westminsters-whatsapp-ways
  65. https://inews.co.uk/news/revelations-matt-hancock-whatsapp-exchanges-2179961
  66. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/right-leak-matt-hancocks-whatsapp-messages-what-told/
  67. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/05/esther-mcvey-covid-inquiry-lockdown-files-matt-hancock-baroness/
  68. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/01/ministers-rally-behind-covid-inquiry-after-hancock-whatsapp-revelations
  69. https://aameranwar.co.uk/press-release-1-march-2023-press-statement-issued-on-behalf-of-the-scottish-covid-bereaved-in-response-to-leaking-of-matt-hancock-100000-whatsapp-messages
  70. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/18/ministers-failed-citizens-wrong-pandemic-covid-report/
  71. https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2023/12/20/cassandra-somers-joce-public-inquiries-the-public-record-and-governmental-accountability/
  72. https://issuesinlawandmedicine.com/articles/law-ethics-and-lockdowns-impacts-on-life-liberty-and-the-economy/
  73. https://unherd.com/newsroom/the-grim-lesson-of-the-lockdown-files/
  74. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/04/whatsapp-whitehall-government-transparency-information-commissioner
  75. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/02/matt-hancock-covid-inquiry-care-homes-hospital-discharge-policy
  76. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/five-things-we-learned-from-the-lockdown-files/
  77. https://labourheartlands.com/the-lockdown-files-calls-for-criminal-investigation-into-matt-hancocks-handling-of-covid-in-light-of-leaked-files/
  78. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/cabinet-office-blocks-whatsapp-messages-diary-boris-johnson-covid-19-inquiry/
  79. https://www.unherd.com/newsroom/the-grim-lesson-of-the-lockdown-files/
  80. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2022-0215/CDP-2022-0215.pdf
  81. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7361259/
  82. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/lockdowns-and-uk-economic-performance
  83. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/covid-lockdown-study-b2351604.html
  84. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lockdown-files-rishi-sunak-on-what-we-werent-told/
  85. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622005329
  86. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/excess-deaths-in-people-with-mental-health-conditions-increased-during-the-covid-19-pandemic
  87. https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/covid-19/what-the-bma-is-doing/the-impact-of-the-pandemic-on-population-health-and-health-inequalities
  88. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-defence-of-isabel-oakeshott/
  89. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/matt-hancock-and-the-politics-of-fear/
  90. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-65888152
  91. https://unherd.com/newsroom/did-the-covid-inquiry-report-just-admit-lockdown-was-a-mistake/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.