ichkeria, when the stuff about MPs' expenses came out, it was offered to The Times. The editor, an honest and principled man, refused to take what was in effect stolen property. The Telegraph bought it - and, to be fair, did a detailed job of analysing and publishing it.
There was a case for not doing this as Parliament was going to pubish it anyway. But it turned out when they did that it was full of convenient redactions so no MPs would get hurt.
On balance, I think the Times was right to refuse it, but I also think with hindsight that the Telegraph was right to print it. It was genuinely in the public interest and there was no other way of publishing it. (And the Times man who refused the story was duly sacked.)
As to the current case, I don't know yet. The incompetence of ministers isn't really news; and yet documenting the government's handling of a major pandemic is something the public ought to know.