Matt Hancock aide claimed to have got negative article demoted on BBC website

An aide to Matt Hancock claimed that he successfully persuaded the BBC to make an article criticising the then health secretary less prominent on its website, The Telegraph can reveal.

Messages contained in The Lockdown Files reveal that in April 2021, Damon Poole - who was advising Mr Hancock on the media - told the MP that he had made the broadcaster place the story into a less important slot on its website, and was trying to keep it off the BBC News at One.

Mr Hancock also told his aide during the pandemic that the BBC needed “putting back in their box”, despite the fact the broadcaster is independent of the Government.

It comes as The Telegraph reveals how criticism of government Covid policies was logged by a “counter-disinformation unit” within the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), which had the power to ask social media companies to remove posts.

The Telegraph can also disclose that the BBC was involved in the DCMS’ “Counter-disinformation Policy Forum” where officials, technology companies, academics and lobby groups discussed how to address the “threat” that misinformation about Covid posed.

‘I think I’m getting it shifted down’

The exchanges about the negative article took place over WhatsApp in the same week as the BBC ran a story about Mr Hancock’s stake in a firm that had won £300,000 in NHS contracts.

While the conversations do not link to the story directly, they are thought to be talking about an article that ran under the headline: “Matt Hancock owns shares in NHS-approved firm.”

The article explained that Mr Hancock owned 15 per cent of his family’s waste disposal firm, Topwood Ltd, which had also won NHS business.

It included quotes from Labour lambasting “cronyism at the heart of this government”.

Jonathan Ashworth, then shadow health secretary, was also quoted, calling for the head of the Civil Service to investigate whether Mr Hancock had broken the Ministerial Code.

Months later, Mr Hancock was found to have broken the code – albeit in a “minor” and “technical” way.

It is understood that Mr Hancock and his team believed the story was misleading, as the contracts in question were in the Labour-run NHS in Wales.

Shortly before 8am on the day the story was published, Mr Poole said he and No 10 officials would call the BBC ahead of “their big editorial meeting” to get some of the attendees “on our side”.

Half an hour later, he told Mr Hancock that the placement of the story had been changed.

“I think I’m getting it shifted down the website,” he said, adding a few minutes later: “Done, it’s still in top stories but quite a bit further down. And fighting to keep it off the one.”

Mr Hancock, who was culture secretary before he was health secretary, responded: “Well done.”

In the end, the story took the second spot on the BBC News at One, after a report on comments made by the Archbishop of Canterbury ahead of the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral. It was further down the billing on the News at Six and the News at Ten.

The article appeared on the BBC homepage for at least six hours that morning, in numerous different positions.

The most prominent was at 6.25am, when it appeared – with a photograph of Mr Hancock – at the top right of the screen.

It then moved between multiple different positions in the second tier of slots, before being relegated to a picture-less headline by 10.45am.

Concerns over impartiality

BBC insiders said that it had moved “in relation to breaking news” and that the corporation makes its own editorial decisions.

As well as raising questions about the BBC caving in to government pressure, the messages are likely to raise fresh concerns over the impartiality of the broadcaster.

It comes after Richard Sharp was forced to resign as BBC chairman when he was found to have breached the rules governing his application for the role.

He failed to disclose that he tried to introduce the Cabinet Secretary to a friend, who later went on to guarantee an £800,000 loan to Boris Johnson, the former prime minister.

Mr Hancock’s discussion with Mr Poole was one of a series of discussions that suggest the former health secretary was willing to try to exert undue influence over the broadcaster.

In April 2020, Mr Hancock told his special adviser that the BBC needed “putting back in their box” after the corporation made a mistake in an article that required correction.

It is not clear from the messages what the article was, but it is believed to have been about PPE shortages.

When the BBC made the change, Mr Hancock told Mr Poole: “Awesome work on the BBC correction. They need putting back in their box.  Maybe they’ll go back to acting responsibly like they did at the start of the crisis.”

Mr Poole responded: “Thanks Matt, that’s very kind. This week has been particularly egregious, there’s definitely been a step change in the output. As you say hopefully this will help get them back to normality.”

‘Can we stop this’

The two men appeared keen to wade into BBC editorial decisions again in January 2021.

Mr Hancock told his aide that he believed BBC Question Time staff had interviewed Dr Julia Patterson, one his most vociferous critics, to see if they wanted her to appear as a panellist.

At the time, Dr Patterson’s EveryDoctor organisation was lobbying MPs to fast-track first vaccine doses for front-line health workers.

It had also joined forces with activist lawyer Jolyon Maughan’s The Good Law Project to bring legal action against the Government for its handling of PPE contracts.

In January 2022, the High Court ruled that the use of its notorious VIP lane for PPE contracts had been illegal.

Speaking long before that judgment, Mr Hancock said “it’s not our call” to say who should be on the Question Time panel, but still asked Mr Poole “can we stop this”.

Mr Poole responded: “Will try.”

Dr Patterson has never appeared on Question Time, but another doctor critical of Mr Hancock appeared on the programme following Dr Patterson’s interview.

She told The Telegraph that she was “unfortunately not surprised” to learn that Mr Hancock had wanted to try and intervene.

However, she said she was “appalled to find out that these types of conversation go on in the background at a time when politicking should be put to the side”.

A spokesman for Mr Hancock said: “Matt’s handed over all materials to the inquiry unredacted.

“It’s hardly surprising Matt’s media adviser handled the media. The inquiry should now be left to look at all the materials objectively so we learn the right lessons.”

Mr Poole declined to comment.

A BBC spokesman said: “Whatever ministerial advisers claimed in WhatsApp chats, it’s nonsense to suggest they have any sway over BBC running orders or panellist selection.

“We’re frequently contacted by representatives of all political parties, and we listen to what they have to say before making our own independent editorial decisions.”