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.
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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[33][34] 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.
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.
[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.
[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.
[43] 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.
[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.