Complaints raised by Matt Hancock about an article referencing his disastrous spell as health secretary have been rejected in comprehensive fashion this week, with the press watchdog IPSO ruling in favour of The Guardian.
IPSO rules against Matt Hancock after complaints raised
Dr. Rachel Clarke wrote back in November 2022 that Hancock was a ‘failed health secretary’, and slammed him for breaking his own lockdown laws. The politician took exception to this description, and filed his grievances shortly afterwards.
In their judgement, IPSO stated that the claims were backed up by ‘contemporaneous evidence’. Hancock didn’t have a leg to stand, given that he had done everything he was accused of – meaning that the scathing assessment could be deemed accurate.
“The article said that the complainant was ‘a failed health secretary and cheating husband who broke the lockdown rules he wrote, doubled down on the lies he told, and helped enrich his mates via the infamous VIP PPE lane’.”
“The publication had been able to provide contemporaneous reporting which referred to the complainant’s personal links with people who worked at such companies. Therefore, Committee did not consider that the third article was significantly inaccurate.” – IPSO
Author laments ‘failed, cheating’ former health secretary
Dr. Clarke has also been reveling in the wake of the verdict, sticking the boot in even harder this time around. She declared that Matt Hancock had ‘set an awful example to the public’, and also took the opportunity to once again denounce his turn as a reality TV star.
“I’m delighted with the findings of the press watchdog. He did fail, he did cheat and he did break lockdown rules. All of which – from the health secretary no less – set a staggeringly awful example to the British public.”
“I’m surprised he had time to pursue an NHS doctor expressing her opinions in print – then again, he had just spent three weeks away from his constituents being paid £400k to eat kangaroo bits in the jungle.” | Dr. Rachel Clarke