What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
It's going to come, but not in a wholesale way. Some sectors will find it beneficial to introduce (see already cruise companies); others won't.
We can forget any government-led inititive, beyond facilitatind vaccination/testing evidence - they just won't be able to organise it.
But we shouldn't underestimate the residual caution that will exist amongst the wider population, even after most have been vaccinated. I supect public demand will drive the application of an effictive passport for many areas.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
Yes, point 2 is crucial. As I understand the anti-card view, it's that the world is divided between the elderly (who may die) and everyone else (who will be fine even if infected). It's simply not true.
* The disease can ruin your life at any age * If you crowd together indoors with lots of unvaccinated people, the disease WILL spread again * If the disease starts spreading again, we'll end up with another lockdown.
Why does anyone want that??? For the sake of not carrying a card so nobody can track how we use it, when most of us use credit cards all the time and any competent intelligence agency can track us far better with those?
Not often that Leon and Richard and I totally agree! Government of National Unity...
There aren't going to be lots of unvaccinated people. There's no problem here for vaccine cards to fix.
Indeed. It is a (terrible) solution in search of a problem. I am utterly staggered that sensible people can't see this....
It's cause you're on Twitter, which I've now come off and am much calmer as a result.
No-one in the real world is talking incessantly about flags. Everyone on Twitter is.
Confession: I have a flegpole.
It came with the house when we bought it and I initially thought I was going to take it out but it endures.
I have on occasion flown the following flegs:
Leeds United Smiley Jolly Roger Naval ensign of the Soviet Union Bisected Black and Red flag as popularised by the anarchists of the Bologna Insurrection Green and white of Fermanagh
OK, so just because some people don't want to show a card demonstrating they've been jabbed, I'm not allowed to go to a venue with like-minded people who are happy to show such a card, and who want the confidence that everyone else there has also been jabbed or tested.
How the hell is that arguable on civil liberty grounds?
I don't care about the vaccine passport per se, I just don't understand what people think they will achieve.
I'm not arguing against them on civil liberties grounds, I'm arguing against them on common sense grounds.
From the discussion in this thread it appears their only real purpose is to act as a mental salve for a significant proportion of people who, even when vaccinated themselves and with a massive fraction of society voluntarily vaxxed at the first opportunity, are still going to feel paranoid about going back to normal, despite the data about the efficacy of the vaccines in preventing hospitalisations and death. Conflating that with the efficacy in preventing any symptoms at all is one of the mistakes here.
It's going to come, but not in a wholesale way. Some sectors will find it beneficial to introduce (see already cruise companies); others won't.
We can forget any government-led inititive, beyond facilitatind vaccination/testing evidence - they just won't be able to organise it.
But we shouldn't underestimate the residual caution that will exist amongst the wider population, even after most have been vaccinated. I supect public demand will drive the application of an effictive passport for many areas.
Not sure if anyone has tried booking a decent restaurant, or nice pub garden, or haircut, or hotel, recently. I'll give you a clue; if you haven't already, you're going to be waiting a while BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL FULLY BOOKED.....
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
Who's dying in your scenario? An unvaccinated person?
That's a risk they've taken by refusing a vaccine.
If you're suggesting that vaccinated people are endangered by non-vaccinated people, please show your working because I don't get it.
You're vaccinated. You have almost 100% protection against severe disease and 70%+ protection against any symptoms at all. An unvaccinated person with COVID, as unlikely as that will be in a highly vaccinated population, is of little risk to you.
Meanwhile there's a potentially emerging health disaster in this country as hospitals are still nowhere near offering a full service, cancer referrals have dropped through the floor (with no underlying reason to think incidence of actual cancer has declined). But Covid.
There was a time when HIV/Aids was a literal death sentence. Now it is not at all. Covid the disease is only as dangerous as the (lack of) tools we have to counter it. When it ceases to have a status above any other circulating disease, then there is no justification in overthrowing decades of public health policy and thousands of years of civil liberties - on a permanent basis, don't anyone pretend otherwise - to counter it.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
Yes, point 2 is crucial. As I understand the anti-card view, it's that the world is divided between the elderly (who may die) and everyone else (who will be fine even if infected). It's simply not true.
* The disease can ruin your life at any age * If you crowd together indoors with lots of unvaccinated people, the disease WILL spread again * If the disease starts spreading again, we'll end up with another lockdown.
Why does anyone want that??? For the sake of not carrying a card so nobody can track how we use it, when most of us use credit cards all the time and any competent intelligence agency can track us far better with those?
Not often that Leon and Richard and I totally agree! Government of National Unity...
lol. Imagine this, ten years ago. Me, you and Richard
Perhaps it is just age?
Still, let us man the trenches of the Sensible Front Line
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Put it this way. I don’t expect it to ever happen. I do expect it to be a useful national debate for a few months. Nobody will care once there’s no deaths being reporting and everything is open.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
Yes, point 2 is crucial. As I understand the anti-card view, it's that the world is divided between the elderly (who may die) and everyone else (who will be fine even if infected). It's simply not true.
* The disease can ruin your life at any age * If you crowd together indoors with lots of unvaccinated people, the disease WILL spread again * If the disease starts spreading again, we'll end up with another lockdown.
Why does anyone want that??? For the sake of not carrying a card so nobody can track how we use it, when most of us use credit cards all the time and any competent intelligence agency can track us far better with those?
Not often that Leon and Richard and I totally agree! Government of National Unity...
lol. Imagine this, ten years ago. Me, you and Richard
Perhaps it is just age?
Still, let us man the trenches of the Sensible Front Line
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
Rather depends on the virus, doesn't it? I'm all in favour of positive thinking and getting back to normal life. That's exactly why I'm potentially in favour of a measure which would make that more possible. At the moment I can't go to the theatre or the opera, or a restaurant. How is that 'normal life'?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
If its down to individual business to choose I don't have a problem with it
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
Yes, point 2 is crucial. As I understand the anti-card view, it's that the world is divided between the elderly (who may die) and everyone else (who will be fine even if infected). It's simply not true.
* The disease can ruin your life at any age * If you crowd together indoors with lots of unvaccinated people, the disease WILL spread again * If the disease starts spreading again, we'll end up with another lockdown.
Why does anyone want that??? For the sake of not carrying a card so nobody can track how we use it, when most of us use credit cards all the time and any competent intelligence agency can track us far better with those?
Not often that Leon and Richard and I totally agree! Government of National Unity...
lol. Imagine this, ten years ago. Me, you and Richard
Perhaps it is just age?
Still, let us man the trenches of the Sensible Front Line
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
Rather depends on the virus, doesn't it? I'm all in favour of positive thinking and getting back to normal life. That's exactly why I'm potentially in favour of a measure which would make that more possible. At the moment I can't go to the theatre or the opera, or a restaurant. How is that 'normal life'?
Which makes me wonder, when are theatres, opera etc going to re-open?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
What I find fascinating is how quickly people forget that we were far closer to normality last summer, without any vaccinations, than we are now, with half the population vaccinated.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
Left and right is pretty meaningless these days. I thought George Galloway was a left-winger but he doesn't seem to be so much these days.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Well quite - this is one of the most ridiculous arguments i've heard. There is no evidence at all at present that the young (and others) won't take up the vaccine in significant numbers. To impose such a policy on the back of a suspicion that they might not is absurd. Wait for it to happen first, and then think about it if you must.
I fear it's going to happen though. People have lost all sense of proportion and assessment of risk. And the Civil Service, as they always have been, are gagging for the idea and won't miss the chance to push it through.
I get more and more depressed hearing Johnson on the subject. Every time it gets raised he starts off pretending that he has great moral objections to the idea and there are great "complexities", but within no more than a few days he takes us closer to it and it's clear that he's just saying that to set up an argument to overrule such objections.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
Quite.
I am honestly mystified by the outrage at the idea we might have to flash our phone at a bouncer for 5 seconds, to get in a pub, when we have all endured being locked down at home FOR MOST OF A YEAR without demur
These apps and passports are an exit route. They are not ideal, but plagues are not ideal. Hopefully, in a year or so, we can junk them, and return to normality, or something close
People have to accept we have been through a history-changing event, like a world war. Liberties are infringed in wars, to ensure national survival. Necessarily. And then they are re-won when we earn the Peace.
No.
The vaccine itself is the exit route.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
The vaccines are not 100% effective. There is still a risk, non trivial, of nasty illness. We don't have enough data yet to assess how much is *truly* risked
As an interim measure, to help us unlockdown, vaccine passports are a good idea. If you haven't got one, get a negative test
FFS we are all commenting here, from our homes, where we have been isolated by government decree for the best part of 12 months. And people are whinging about a possible app, temporary and expedient, that might let us out!
It is bewildering. The perfect is the enemy of the LET ME HAVE A DRINK WITH MY FRIENDS
Get over it. If the government makes the app mandatory for years, that is the time to march on parliament. Right now I just want to get out of my home, with a QR code if required
The Government doesn't seem to be proposing "vaccine passports" in the next few months. Only once everyone has been offered a vaccine. At which point, what is the point?
To make the last few holdouts choose between not being vaccinated and the pub/theatre/cinema.
If you need a passport for the pub, will you need one for the public transport (you mustn't drink and drive) and one for the kebab shop afterwards?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
Cruise companies and airlines are already deciding; others will follow.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
Cruise companies and airlines are already deciding; others will follow.
Repeat after me, conditions for foreign travel are a lot different to everyday restrictions
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
What I find fascinating is how quickly people forget that we were far closer to normality last summer, without any vaccinations, than we are now, with half the population vaccinated.
Clearly, we were nowhere near normality last summer... we were just in a delusion. The autumn and winter proved that.
What worries me about the unvaccinated is not necessarily that they will have 3 times the risk of catching the virus given the same exposure as a vaccinated person, but that they are also likely to be hanging around with other unvaccinated people and thus multiplying the risk further.
The one refusenik I know (healing crystals type, in her 70s) is definitely not following lockdown rules and mixes frequently with other refuseniks.
Of course, she's bound to get some immunity sooner or later and I'm amazed she hasn't already. Perhaps those crystals really do work.
On the other hand, I'm not installing any tracking apps (except Strava or equivalent).
I wonder is Boris is feeling guilty about previous decisions and is allowing himself to be captured by the overly cautious?
Former LD MP David Alton hasn't been in the news for about 30 years, but that changed tonight when China named him in the tweet mentioned earlier, along with Neil O'Brien, Tim Loughton, Tim Tugendhat and Nus Ghani.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
What I find fascinating is how quickly people forget that we were far closer to normality last summer, without any vaccinations, than we are now, with half the population vaccinated.
Clearly, we were nowhere near normality last summer... we were just in a delusion. The autumn and winter proved that.
Had a lovely holiday, long before the mask rule was brought in. Shopping, drinking, eating inside, staying in hotels.
The risk was minimal. Case levels were remarkably low.
That was without vaccinations
With vaccinations they'll not only stay low, but continue to fall. Because that is how epidemiology works....
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
The arguments are already being set up against this. It is almost official Labour policy already. "It must be made mandatory because if the Government think it's a good idea they shouldn't leave it in the hands of the pub owners, and those that choose to implement it shouldn't be punished through relative loss of trade as a result".
It's one thing to think it won't happen because there won't be a public health need for it. But this is looking at it from the wrong angle. If the Government want it to happen (for reasons which have nothing to do with Covid) then they will use Covid as the excuse to make it happen. They control the messaging on public health. If they say there is a public health need, then it will be difficult if not impossible to resist.
The other point that of course isn't mentioned is (if you are using apps etc, rather than photo identity cards) is how you prevent people sharing/borrowing others certification? I'm not at all sure...
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Well quite - this is one of the most ridiculous arguments i've heard. There is no evidence at all at present that the young (and others) won't take up the vaccine in significant numbers. To impose such a policy on the back of a suspicion that they might not is absurd. Wait for it to happen first, and then think about it if you must.
I fear it's going to happen though. People have lost all sense of proportion and assessment of risk. And the Civil Service, as they always have been, are gagging for the idea and won't miss the chance to push it through.
I get more and more depressed hearing Johnson on the subject. Every time it gets raised he starts off pretending that he has great moral objections to the idea and there are great "complexities", but within no more than a few days he takes us closer to it and it's clear that he's just saying that to set up an argument to overrule such objections.
Just to say that if a few fearful oldies try to ruin life indefinitely with pettifogging rules, there will be far greater risks to the vaccinated than the vanishingly unlikely chances of catching a bad cold.
1) economic stagnation 2) social disorder 3) prolonged mental health difficulties
What worries me about the unvaccinated is not necessarily that they will have 3 times the risk of catching the virus given the same exposure as a vaccinated person, but that they are also likely to be hanging around with other unvaccinated people and thus multiplying the risk further.
The one refusenik I know (healing crystals type, in her 70s) is definitely not following lockdown rules and mixes frequently with other refuseniks.
Of course, she's bound to get some immunity sooner or later and I'm amazed she hasn't already. Perhaps those crystals really do work.
On the other hand, I'm not installing any tracking apps (except Strava or equivalent).
I wonder is Boris is feeling guilty about previous decisions and is allowing himself to be captured by the overly cautious?
I agree that people who've been offered the vaccine and refused to have it can't be allowed to wreck things for everyone else. That isn't acceptable, even to libertarians.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
The arguments are already being set up against this. It is almost official Labour policy already. "It must be made mandatory because if the Government think it's a good idea they shouldn't leave it in the hands of the pub owners, and those that choose to implement it shouldn't be punished through relative loss of trade as a result".
It's one thing to think it won't happen because there won't be a public health need for it. But this is looking at it from the wrong angle. If the Government want it to happen (for reasons which have nothing to do with Covid) then they will use Covid as the excuse to make it happen. They control the messaging on public health. If they say there is a public health need, then it will be difficult if not impossible to resist.
The way to resist it is to boycott pubs , restaurants, theatres etc.....then their economic recovery goes awry
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
I have found this one of the very few pleasures of this pandemic. Being on the same side as BluestBlue, MaxPB, Leon, yourself and FrancisUrquhart amongst others on most of the Covid issues.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
The arguments are already being set up against this. It is almost official Labour policy already. "It must be made mandatory because if the Government think it's a good idea they shouldn't leave it in the hands of the pub owners, and those that choose to implement it shouldn't be punished through relative loss of trade as a result".
It's one thing to think it won't happen because there won't be a public health need for it. But this is looking at it from the wrong angle. If the Government want it to happen (for reasons which have nothing to do with Covid) then they will use Covid as the excuse to make it happen. They control the messaging on public health. If they say there is a public health need, then it will be difficult if not impossible to resist.
The way to resist it is to boycott pubs , restaurants, theatres etc.....then their economic recovery goes awry
60-70% of the population will be in favour of it. Pubs will go bust. The latter won't change the minds of the former. The former will prevail.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
Former LD MP David Alton hasn't been in the news for about 30 years, but that changed tonight when China named him in the tweet mentioned earlier, along with Neil O'Brien, Tim Loughton, Tim Tugendhat and Nus Ghani.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
I have found this one of the very few pleasures of this pandemic. Being on the same side as BluestBlue, MaxPB, Leon, yourself and FrancisUrquhart amongst others on most of the Covid issues.
There are things that matter above quibbles about equality and redistribution. In this case retaining a liberal democracy where everything not explicitly forbidden is allowed
And all we got was this shitty t-shirt hail of smears and abuse.
Highly misleading though. They never had the option of selling it more expensively. Selling it at cost was the price they paid to have a vaccine at all.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Well quite - this is one of the most ridiculous arguments i've heard. There is no evidence at all at present that the young (and others) won't take up the vaccine in significant numbers. To impose such a policy on the back of a suspicion that they might not is absurd. Wait for it to happen first, and then think about it if you must.
I fear it's going to happen though. People have lost all sense of proportion and assessment of risk. And the Civil Service, as they always have been, are gagging for the idea and won't miss the chance to push it through.
I get more and more depressed hearing Johnson on the subject. Every time it gets raised he starts off pretending that he has great moral objections to the idea and there are great "complexities", but within no more than a few days he takes us closer to it and it's clear that he's just saying that to set up an argument to overrule such objections.
Just to say that if a few fearful oldies try to ruin life indefinitely with pettifogging rules, there will be far greater risks to the vaccinated than the vanishingly unlikely chances of catching a bad cold.
1) economic stagnation 2) social disorder 3) prolonged mental health difficulties
I think you'll find it's the government you voted for that is going to push this through.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
Rather depends on the virus, doesn't it? I'm all in favour of positive thinking and getting back to normal life. That's exactly why I'm potentially in favour of a measure which would make that more possible. At the moment I can't go to the theatre or the opera, or a restaurant. How is that 'normal life'?
Then you should be badgering your Tory MP to stop the extension of the Coronavirus Act for a further 6 months. Remove that Act and the restrictions under it and you can go to as many theatres, operas and restaurants as you want.
Incidentally, it's notable that in all the discussion about vax passports no-one mentions the staff who are overwhelmingly young and unvaccinated. How anyone expects any hospitality venue to open if vax passports are needed when the staff will be unvaccinated is a mystery.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Would you want to stop individual business turning unvaccinated people away?
I don't expect it to become necessary, and I think the issue will be avoided by the govt refusing to issue anything official.
The arguments are already being set up against this. It is almost official Labour policy already. "It must be made mandatory because if the Government think it's a good idea they shouldn't leave it in the hands of the pub owners, and those that choose to implement it shouldn't be punished through relative loss of trade as a result".
It's one thing to think it won't happen because there won't be a public health need for it. But this is looking at it from the wrong angle. If the Government want it to happen (for reasons which have nothing to do with Covid) then they will use Covid as the excuse to make it happen. They control the messaging on public health. If they say there is a public health need, then it will be difficult if not impossible to resist.
The way to resist it is to boycott pubs , restaurants, theatres etc.....then their economic recovery goes awry
60-70% of the population will be in favour of it. Pubs will go bust. The latter won't change the minds of the former. The former will prevail.
shrugs then pubs, theatres, cinemas etc go bust because they complied and reduced their footfall by 30%. They should have sat up and said No Boris
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Nope. Don't accept them. Have some faith and understand the science.
It's cause you're on Twitter, which I've now come off and am much calmer as a result.
No-one in the real world is talking incessantly about flags. Everyone on Twitter is.
Confession: I have a flegpole.
It came with the house when we bought it and I initially thought I was going to take it out but it endures.
I have on occasion flown the following flegs:
Leeds United Smiley Jolly Roger Naval ensign of the Soviet Union Bisected Black and Red flag as popularised by the anarchists of the Bologna Insurrection Green and white of Fermanagh
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
How can the EU agree it when half the populace are saying they will refuse the jab in some countries?
We haven't reached the stage where refuseniks are a problem given the lack of supply, but it will be interesting to see what happens when the supply is available. It is possible that the UK might already have vaccinated a higher proportion of the population than France is ever going to.
Perhaps take up will increase as the effects become ever more obvious.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
No sorry not accepting them nor is my phone moving off my desk. If I cant go to a pub we will just gather in each others houses and nothing of value is lost to us. Will only be lost to people like you that can't do without a pub when it goes bust because too many people are opting out
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
Rather depends on the virus, doesn't it? I'm all in favour of positive thinking and getting back to normal life. That's exactly why I'm potentially in favour of a measure which would make that more possible. At the moment I can't go to the theatre or the opera, or a restaurant. How is that 'normal life'?
Then you should be badgering your Tory MP to stop the extension of the Coronavirus Act for a further 6 months. Remove that Act and the restrictions under it and you can go to as many theatres, operas and restaurants as you want.
Incidentally, it's notable that in all the discussion about vax passports no-one mentions the staff who are overwhelmingly young and unvaccinated. How anyone expects any hospitality venue to open if vax passports are needed when the staff will be unvaccinated is a mystery.
A very good point.
I am staggered how many MPs voted through the extension today. Not a single one will be receiving any donations from me in the future.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
The EU may well introduce rules for travel. Most countries will. But that is not a serious imposition to civil liberties, albeit it is unfortunate for those who won't get vaccinated (although it seems there may still be alternatives in the way of negative tests). But i can't see the EU (or most European countries) introducing domestic passports of the sort that is being contemplated here. And if they did, i think that they will quickly become ignored. European countries are often like that.
It is only really in the EU where if rules are set people feel obliged to follow them.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Don't be naive. If this sort of nonsense is introduced you will never get rid of it. Authoritarian governments are itching to micro-manage and control and know about what citizens are up to. They are simply using Covid as an excuse to introduce what will become ID cards under another name. We now have an authoritarian government which cares not a jot for our civil liberties or long-standing freedoms. They will find a reason to extend it.
It's going to come, but not in a wholesale way. Some sectors will find it beneficial to introduce (see already cruise companies); others won't.
We can forget any government-led inititive, beyond facilitatind vaccination/testing evidence - they just won't be able to organise it.
But we shouldn't underestimate the residual caution that will exist amongst the wider population, even after most have been vaccinated. I supect public demand will drive the application of an effictive passport for many areas.
Not sure if anyone has tried booking a decent restaurant, or nice pub garden, or haircut, or hotel, recently. I'll give you a clue; if you haven't already, you're going to be waiting a while BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL FULLY BOOKED.....
Yes, was very surprised (and disappointed) to discover this week that I couldn’t find a table at J Sheekey on a Thursday night in June!
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
That isn’t worth what amounts to a National ID card scheme.
The young will sort themselves out, when they need to use their actual passport.
This is on a blog dedicated to one of the best essayists around at the moment, Theodore Dalrymple.
"Humility on a Cellular Level By David Seri on March 19, 2021 The good doctor attempts to come to terms with his mobile phone dependence in this week’s Takimag column.
A sensible person does not have to be permanently contactable, and indeed, when I look back, some of my happiest times have been the months in which I was totally incommunicado. My recent dependence on my phone, however, has revealed to me that I am exactly like others in my folly, no worse but no better. I am humbled, if not humiliated, by my phone."
I think judging by comments the government if it tries to mandate this is going to receive a lot of pushback, those on the side of no vaxports are a diverse crowd so are those supporting them. However does still seem to me there are more opposers than supporters
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
So?
The 'non-vulnerable' may also get run over by a bus on the way to the pub.
Like other people have said, our vaccine uptake is going to be circa 90% anyway. If the odd person in a pub is unvaccinated, it simply doesn't matter.
I just can't wrap my head around why this is necessary in any way and why pub owners would even want this.
Pub owners might not want it. But if the alternative is that they either stay closed altogether, or have to impose draconian social distancing rules, then they might prefer this solution.
Think about theatres, a better example than pubs. At the moment they are closed completely. Some of them hope to re-open, but with social distancing it's extremely hard to make it viable. Why wouldn't they prefer to have a full house with punters showing their eligibility?
To be clear, this is a temporary intermediate stage between full lockdown and unlimited, restriction-free re-opening. If we are very lucky indeed, we might be able to go straight to the latter. In which case, great. But if not....?
The vast majority of the punters in pubs or theatres or whatever are going to be vaccinated, regardless of whether they have a "vaccine passport" or not. That number grows by the day.
Therefore I remain unconvinced that vaccine passports will make any significant difference to our COVID death count.
As stated by others, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
They may not make a significant difference to the overall death count but they would have made a very significant difference to anyone who dies as a result of their absence.
What, honestly, is the objection? When I go to a pub or a restaurant I would like to feel reasonably sure that that I am not going to be exposed to covid.
Is that really so outrageous?
After herd immunity has kicked in, your desire to be a minuscule bit safer is a) not worth the civil liberties imposition that either continued restrictions on individuals lives and b) not significant enough to change behaviour encouraging business to impose it.
I think it’s more complex than that. You’re right in principle, but in practice I see a role for the threat of using vaccine passports to ensure the young (who don’t feel in danger and might not get round to both jabs) take the time to get done, thus ensuring that herd immunity happens.
I am 34. Every single person I know aged 18-40 can't wait for their jabs. A couple of hundred people.
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
Well quite - this is one of the most ridiculous arguments i've heard. There is no evidence at all at present that the young (and others) won't take up the vaccine in significant numbers. To impose such a policy on the back of a suspicion that they might not is absurd. Wait for it to happen first, and then think about it if you must.
I fear it's going to happen though. People have lost all sense of proportion and assessment of risk. And the Civil Service, as they always have been, are gagging for the idea and won't miss the chance to push it through.
I get more and more depressed hearing Johnson on the subject. Every time it gets raised he starts off pretending that he has great moral objections to the idea and there are great "complexities", but within no more than a few days he takes us closer to it and it's clear that he's just saying that to set up an argument to overrule such objections.
Dare I say it, but we need Dominic Cummings back, to tell the “Civil” service to go f*** themselves.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Nope. Don't accept them. Have some faith and understand the science.
Alright, let's put it another way
South Korea had, in effect, Vaccine Passport Apps from the beginning, because they are a hi-tech. well-educated society, and because they'd endured the sobering effects of SARS. As soon as Covid arrived, they turned on the apps, and the government monitored the citizens, warning them when they were near an outbreak, and telling them to stay away and so forth
South Korea has multiple connections with China, it had a big early cluster of Covid, it was unwarned about this particular virus, it is densely populated, it should have suffered terribly. The result?
It has 100,000 cases TOTAL and 1,700 deaths TOTAL. Orders of magnitude less than the UK - where we had more warning, weeks in advance
As a result, South Korea's economy has NOT shrunk by 10% and it has NOT taken on debt equivalent to 100% of GDP and it is now leading a virtually normal life. 130,000 Koreans did not die.
The idea we will not copy what worked for Korea, so well, is intriguingly dim. Of course we will. We will use the apps.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
The left-right axis has lost all its potency since COVID 19. I think liberty and safety are more visceral instincts for most people.
I think judging by comments the government if it tries to mandate this is going to receive a lot of pushback, those on the side of no vaxports are a diverse crowd so are those supporting them. However does still seem to me there are more opposers than supporters
One thing that has been consistent through this is that the public does not trust the rest of the public to keep them safe - hence the strong support for lockdown and blaming the public over the government for lockdown two and three.
The public will therefore most likely support vaccine cards because they don't trust the rest of the public to be vaccinated and keep them safe.
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Nope. Don't accept them. Have some faith and understand the science.
Alright, let's put it another way
South Korea had, in effect, Vaccine Passport Apps from the beginning, because they are a hi-tech. well-educated society, and because they'd endured the sobering effects of SARS. As soon as Covid arrived, they turned on the apps, and the government monitored the citizens, warning them when they were near an outbreak, and telling them to stay away and so forth
South Korea has multiple connections with China, it had a big early cluster of Covid, it was unwarned about this particular virus, it is densely populated, it should have suffered terribly. The result?
It has 100,000 cases TOTAL and 1,700 deaths TOTAL. Orders of magnitude less than the UK - where we had more warning, weeks in advance
As a result, South Korea's economy has NOT shrunk by 10% and it has NOT taken on debt equivalent to 100% of GDP and it is now leading a virtually normal life. 130,000 Koreans did not die.
The idea we will not copy what worked for Korea, so well, is intriguingly dim. Of course we will. We will use the apps.
Buy shares in non smartphones then....the idea we would accept the sort of tracking the koreans do is naive
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
I think judging by comments the government if it tries to mandate this is going to receive a lot of pushback, those on the side of no vaxports are a diverse crowd so are those supporting them. However does still seem to me there are more opposers than supporters
One thing that has been consistent through this is that the public does not trust the rest of the public to keep them safe - hence the strong support for lockdown and blaming the public over the government for lockdown two and three.
The public will therefore most likely support vaccine cards because they don't trust the rest of the public to be vaccinated and keep them safe.
While there was no vaccine no of course we didnt because most of us know some of the public. Once vaccination has run its course though covid comes down to the same level as seasonal flu then we arent going to tolerate lockdown
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
What I find fascinating is how quickly people forget that we were far closer to normality last summer, without any vaccinations, than we are now, with half the population vaccinated.
Clearly, we were nowhere near normality last summer... we were just in a delusion. The autumn and winter proved that.
I enjoyed camping with my friends and walking to lovely country pubs every day. The memory keeps me sane.
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
Some of us oldies will be meeting up in private homes too, advantages being we dont need to endure the overloud jukebox, drive home, have to bother with closing time
What a lot of us will do if pubs put in vax ports, in fact I will probably get a vax port just so if a pub demands it I can wave it in their face and say yes I have one but you arent getting any money off me for demanding it
Of course the other thing being hardly discussed is the issues of enforcement. How do you prevent people sharing/borrowing other people’s vaccine passports?
So of course there will be another opportunity for a new offence with a £10k fine (copyright: Priti Patel) to be introduced.
Of course the other thing being hardly discussed is the issues of enforcement. How do you prevent people sharing/borrowing other people’s vaccine passports?
So of course there will be another opportunity for a new offence with a £10k fine (copyright: Priti Patel) to be introduced.
I was thinking about this earlier. But, also, how do you stop people sharing phones with each other? Or perhaps this is a sign of being out of date: today most people would rather do anything than share their phone with someone else.
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
So it’s gone from a voluntary scheme (for pubs who feel they need to introduce it to reassure their customers) to a mandatory scheme in little more than 24 hours. Quel surprise.
I’m still unconvinced that any suggestion of vaccine passports for pubs can deal with tourists, given that those enforcing rules will be nightclub bouncers rather than customs or immigration officers who understand the documents they look at.
The whole thing is bollocks, but we all need to tell our MP that we know it’s bollocks.
Of course the other thing being hardly discussed is the issues of enforcement. How do you prevent people sharing/borrowing other people’s vaccine passports?
So of course there will be another opportunity for a new offence with a £10k fine (copyright: Priti Patel) to be introduced.
I was thinking about this earlier. But, also, how do you stop people sharing phones with each other? Or perhaps this is a sign of being out of date: today most people would rather do anything than share their phone with someone else.
Before covid when we went down the pub we had a no phone rule because it got to the point that some would spend all their time on the phone while in the pub posting on facebook and the ones who didnt said look either we stop going or we leave the phones home
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
This is actually another point. If the Govt is going to introduce rules for accessing pubs and other venues which minimise social distancing then how can they lift rules for social mixing in private homes? Or at other venues? Weddings? Hotels? (does there have to be a bouncer manning the doors of the hotel bar?) They can’t. It’s totally inconsistent and illogical.
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
Some of us oldies will be meeting up in private homes too, advantages being we dont need to endure the overloud jukebox, drive home, have to bother with closing time
What a lot of us will do if pubs put in vax ports, in fact I will probably get a vax port just so if a pub demands it I can wave it in their face and say yes I have one but you arent getting any money off me for demanding it
Pubs voluntarily asking for it I’m not concerned about. The answer is they won’t. A voluntary scheme will rapidly wither and die. The problem is the Govt will make it mandatory to ensure it happens. Then it won’t be the pub’s fault.
Obviously Baker has an incentive to exaggerate, but if true us younguns' will just meet up in private homes, with cheap booze and no closing hours. No party like a house party.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
Some of us oldies will be meeting up in private homes too, advantages being we dont need to endure the overloud jukebox, drive home, have to bother with closing time
What a lot of us will do if pubs put in vax ports, in fact I will probably get a vax port just so if a pub demands it I can wave it in their face and say yes I have one but you arent getting any money off me for demanding it
Pubs voluntarily asking for it I’m not concerned about. The answer is they won’t. A voluntary scheme will rapidly wither and die. The problem is the Govt will make it mandatory to ensure it happens. Then it won’t be the pub’s fault.
And who is going to enforce this?
Not sure if anyone noticed, but lots of places weren't applying the rules last year.
If they think its going to happen after herd immunity has kicked in, they're having a laugh.
By July Covid will be largely eliminated. Why are so many worrywarts fixated on rules for a non problem?
What a coincidence that today's In Our Time with Melvyn Bragg was on David Ricardo.
"At a time when nations preferred to be self-sufficient, to produce all their own food and manufacture their own goods, and to find markets for export rather than import, Ricardo argued for free trade even with rivals for the benefit of all."
Can anyone explain to me why a certificate showing you've been jabbed or tested is a major infringement of your civil liberties, but a card shown by a youngster to prove they're over 18, or a bus pass to prove you're over 65, or an Oyster card, isn't?
The nature of what they're asking for is the issue. They want to do it with the existing app which essentially allows the state to track your movements in very high detail without the judicial protections that come with criminal investigations and warrants necessary to do it otherwise.
It's something dreamt up by Priti Patel and the public health people who think they know what's best for us and would have everyone stay home all the time forever.
OK, but if it was a physical card, like youngsters have to show to get into a pub or nightclub, that would be OK, yes? If not, why not?
Yeah no issue if it was like a driver's license. It's the idea of the app that is awful for me. I'm not sure we'll need it given overall vaccination rates and I'm also not sure how it will handle tourism, do foreign nationals not get to enjoy the nation's pubs and bars?
100 times this. They’re not dealing with a closed system, there’s two hundred countries out there, with two hundred standards for vaccine approvals and certificates. Before we start on people like me, who will be in the U.K. on a U.K. passport having been vaccinated abroad.
This is one area where the EU will prevail. AKA the Brussels Effect, and we will feel it.
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
So how will that work for my parents who can't use a smartphone?
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
My mum can't use a smartphone. But she doesn't really go anywhere. She's in her 80s.
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Nope. Don't accept them. Have some faith and understand the science.
Alright, let's put it another way
South Korea had, in effect, Vaccine Passport Apps from the beginning, because they are a hi-tech. well-educated society, and because they'd endured the sobering effects of SARS. As soon as Covid arrived, they turned on the apps, and the government monitored the citizens, warning them when they were near an outbreak, and telling them to stay away and so forth
South Korea has multiple connections with China, it had a big early cluster of Covid, it was unwarned about this particular virus, it is densely populated, it should have suffered terribly. The result?
It has 100,000 cases TOTAL and 1,700 deaths TOTAL. Orders of magnitude less than the UK - where we had more warning, weeks in advance
As a result, South Korea's economy has NOT shrunk by 10% and it has NOT taken on debt equivalent to 100% of GDP and it is now leading a virtually normal life. 130,000 Koreans did not die.
The idea we will not copy what worked for Korea, so well, is intriguingly dim. Of course we will. We will use the apps.
What's the rational reason for requiring a vaccine to go into a pub? Once the vulnerable are vaccinated the NHS is no longer in any danger of collapse. At that point refusing a vaccine is just a personal choice, and a personal risk.
1. The vaccines won't give 100% protection, just a mere 90+% [if we're lucky]. If everyone going to the venue is vaccinated, you've got the mathematical product of the protection factor for each chain of potential infection (90% protection one stage, 99% two stages, 99.9% three stages, etc); if lots of them aren't, then you've lost that.
2. The 'non-vulnerable' might still have their lives wrecked by the disease.
No, it's time to end this way of thinking. We need to get back to normal life, with all the risk-taking that entails.
One thing that has been interesting is this does not seem to be a left right divide. I never thought I would be on the same side as kinablu or gallowgate for example
The left-right axis has lost all its potency since COVID 19. I think liberty and safety are more visceral instincts for most people.
The instinct for liberty in general terms has been confined to a small minority, though many have disregarded instructions they find too annoying. The government's strategy to spread fear has worked only too well.
Comments
Similarly we have opinion polling showing HUGE take up.
Instituting a costly and ongoing civil liberty breaching absurdity is not the way to achieve an almost non problem (non-take up of vaccine amongst a tiny proportion of the young) - £10 Amazon vouchers are the way...
It's going to come, but not in a wholesale way. Some sectors will find it beneficial to introduce (see already cruise companies); others won't.
We can forget any government-led inititive, beyond facilitatind vaccination/testing evidence - they just won't be able to organise it.
But we shouldn't underestimate the residual caution that will exist amongst the wider population, even after most have been vaccinated. I supect public demand will drive the application of an effictive passport for many areas.
It doesn't seem to achieve any more than that.
There was a time when HIV/Aids was a literal death sentence. Now it is not at all. Covid the disease is only as dangerous as the (lack of) tools we have to counter it. When it ceases to have a status above any other circulating disease, then there is no justification in overthrowing decades of public health policy and thousands of years of civil liberties - on a permanent basis, don't anyone pretend otherwise - to counter it.
Perhaps it is just age?
Still, let us man the trenches of the Sensible Front Line
Perhaps a past life?
Not to be outdone the British government is proposing an assault on our civil liberties.
Meanwhile, the Lib Dems have rediscovered a bit of their spine and will vote against the Coronavirus Act.
Have I missed anything?
I fear it's going to happen though. People have lost all sense of proportion and assessment of risk. And the Civil Service, as they always have been, are gagging for the idea and won't miss the chance to push it through.
I get more and more depressed hearing Johnson on the subject. Every time it gets raised he starts off pretending that he has great moral objections to the idea and there are great "complexities", but within no more than a few days he takes us closer to it and it's clear that he's just saying that to set up an argument to overrule such objections.
The one refusenik I know (healing crystals type, in her 70s) is definitely not following lockdown rules and mixes frequently with other refuseniks.
Of course, she's bound to get some immunity sooner or later and I'm amazed she hasn't already. Perhaps those crystals really do work.
On the other hand, I'm not installing any tracking apps (except Strava or equivalent).
I wonder is Boris is feeling guilty about previous decisions and is allowing himself to be captured by the overly cautious?
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1374941387435687938
The risk was minimal. Case levels were remarkably low.
That was without vaccinations
With vaccinations they'll not only stay low, but continue to fall. Because that is how epidemiology works....
Fortunately, no twitter in those days, so I avoided major embarrassment.
It's one thing to think it won't happen because there won't be a public health need for it. But this is looking at it from the wrong angle. If the Government want it to happen (for reasons which have nothing to do with Covid) then they will use Covid as the excuse to make it happen. They control the messaging on public health. If they say there is a public health need, then it will be difficult if not impossible to resist.
The other point that of course isn't mentioned is (if you are using apps etc, rather than photo identity cards) is how you prevent people sharing/borrowing others certification? I'm not at all sure...
They are already talking about an EU-wide VaxPass app. It will probably happen, because the EU is so reliant on mass tourism, including huge EU countries like France, Italy and Spain
Once the EU agrees its vaccine passport, it will, perforce, be adopted by the UK (tho we might give it another name to save face). That will then become the accepted app - possibly copied around the world, given that the EU drives so much global tourism - and that's it. There we are. That's the new worldwide standard. It will then be taken up by private UK business, as they so decide, is my guess...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56427830
If the EU is unable to agree this, it is finished. For that reason, they will agree it. I think
1) economic stagnation
2) social disorder
3) prolonged mental health difficulties
I'll give you a clue.
It won't be required.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9404353/AstraZeneca-lost-21-BILLION-profits-selling-Covid-vaccine-cheaply.html
And all we got was this
shitty t-shirthail of smears and abuse.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9403689/Rutgers-allow-fully-vaccinated-students-campus-Fall-2021-semester.html
Look, this is shitty and unideal. But this is a plague. Plagues are unideal. I sincerely believe these apps are coming and denying it is futile and counter-productive, they are, however, a means of opening up economies faster, so they will happen
People of a libertarian bent (like me) have to accept this, and work to make sure they disappear ASAP, like the virus
Incidentally, it's notable that in all the discussion about vax passports no-one mentions the staff who are overwhelmingly young and unvaccinated. How anyone expects any hospitality venue to open if vax passports are needed when the staff will be unvaccinated is a mystery.
We haven't reached the stage where refuseniks are a problem given the lack of supply, but it will be interesting to see what happens when the supply is available. It is possible that the UK might already have vaccinated a higher proportion of the population than France is ever going to.
Perhaps take up will increase as the effects become ever more obvious.
I am staggered how many MPs voted through the extension today. Not a single one will be receiving any donations from me in the future.
It is only really in the EU where if rules are set people feel obliged to follow them.
The young will sort themselves out, when they need to use their actual passport.
This is on a blog dedicated to one of the best essayists around at the moment, Theodore Dalrymple.
"Humility on a Cellular Level
By David Seri on March 19, 2021
The good doctor attempts to come to terms with his mobile phone dependence in this week’s Takimag column.
A sensible person does not have to be permanently contactable, and indeed, when I look back, some of my happiest times have been the months in which I was totally incommunicado. My recent dependence on my phone, however, has revealed to me that I am exactly like others in my folly, no worse but no better. I am humbled, if not humiliated, by my phone."
http://www.skepticaldoctor.com
That's the real headline, surely?
South Korea had, in effect, Vaccine Passport Apps from the beginning, because they are a hi-tech. well-educated society, and because they'd endured the sobering effects of SARS. As soon as Covid arrived, they turned on the apps, and the government monitored the citizens, warning them when they were near an outbreak, and telling them to stay away and so forth
South Korea has multiple connections with China, it had a big early cluster of Covid, it was unwarned about this particular virus, it is densely populated, it should have suffered terribly. The result?
It has 100,000 cases TOTAL and 1,700 deaths TOTAL. Orders of magnitude less than the UK - where we had more warning, weeks in advance
As a result, South Korea's economy has NOT shrunk by 10% and it has NOT taken on debt equivalent to 100% of GDP and it is now leading a virtually normal life. 130,000 Koreans did not die.
The idea we will not copy what worked for Korea, so well, is intriguingly dim. Of course we will. We will use the apps.
The public will therefore most likely support vaccine cards because they don't trust the rest of the public to be vaccinated and keep them safe.
Either that or in an act of petty rebellion I'm going to make sure that I'm permanently able to go to the pub, if that means the Govt is going to be spending £100+/week on LFTs, so be it.
If the Govt wants to encourage the young to get their vaccine, offer £20 for a first jab, £30 for a second. The distribution system already exists (ONS survey which I'm part of).
What a lot of us will do if pubs put in vax ports, in fact I will probably get a vax port just so if a pub demands it I can wave it in their face and say yes I have one but you arent getting any money off me for demanding it
So of course there will be another opportunity for a new offence with a £10k fine (copyright: Priti Patel) to be introduced.
The whole thing is bollocks, but we all need to tell our MP that we know it’s bollocks.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56528112
Suspended schoolmaster at the centre of the controversy is understood to be receiving police protection after parents protest"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/25/protest-yorkshire-school-cartoon-muhammed-shown-class/
Not sure if anyone noticed, but lots of places weren't applying the rules last year.
If they think its going to happen after herd immunity has kicked in, they're having a laugh.
By July Covid will be largely eliminated. Why are so many worrywarts fixated on rules for a non problem?
"At a time when nations preferred to be self-sufficient, to produce all their own food and manufacture their own goods, and to find markets for export rather than import, Ricardo argued for free trade even with rivals for the benefit of all."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000tfjk
Vaccine.