Vaccine Passports

I don't know if this is what they are meaning but perhaps they are saying that they wouldn't mind a vaccine passport to open things up before everyone has had one who needs one. So, for example, things could open tomorrow but only the elderly, extremely clinically vulnerable and care worker/NHS staff could go to those places atm as they will be the only ones who have had the vaccine. It would of course prompt massive complaints of how unfair that is that young people can't do things when they've made sacrifices but the elderly can. If it would help businesses though (I know it probably wouldn't because support would stop etc. although not everyone has been eligible for help), would people be willing to be selfless and let those who can access them do so or would they rather the business be closed to all and possibly go under if they can't personally go?

 

Personally I find the idea that those we have sacrificed everything for being allowed freedom while we all stay locked away to protect them still so they can do as they please quote sickening.

 

I don't think it will pan out that way if I'm honest but we will have to see.

 

I don't think it should happen but you'd think that all those who were saying that people who were in favour of lockdown were wanting businesses to go under would be happy for it to happen. They were only caring about the businesses apparently when they were saying that they should be allowed to open; it wasn't for their sake, it was for the business. Well, if a business could do special old people or nhs showings then you'd think those people would be all for it. Unless it wasn't really the business they cared about at all.

It wouldn't be to protect them, they're already protected. It would be to protect those who still wouldn't have had a vaccine but needs one. As they still need one, they obviously wouldn't be able to go either.

 

All the highly vulnerable groups are vaccinated. The deaths in the unvaccinated groups are a very small number and it must be treated as such

 

1) That's not actually true. Pre-existing conditions, other than a few very specific things, are group 6 which haven't been done yet.
but mainly
2) I'm not advocating for that idea, I was trying to think of a reason someone might give for saying they'd want vaccine passports for entertainment places etc. I didn't pick that option as I think it should be for overseas travel only.

 

You make many valid points on this.

Although I think whilst they had the "transmission" element relatively uncovered the government were scared to do anything.

Now those are coming through and showing positives, suddenly the route out is published.

I do agree with your point though, the young were classed as leas risk, but old and vulnerable are more or less covered, so......

 

Showing you've had the jab if you go abroad makes sense "for now". We are doing far better than most of the world so wouldn't want to ruin it for ourselves letting people in who haven't been jabbed.

Domestically it shouldn't happen. People should be able to go where they want, when they want. Any business who'd shorten their customer base by restricting it to those who can prove they have been vaccinated would be silly.

I don't see what good a modern phone with the Serco app downloaded will be to the millions who don't have a phone or don't have a compatible phone. to get sports venues packed again.....

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14142428/wembley-stadium-90k-fans-for-euro-final/

As well as the phone idea they should let everyone have a small ID card with a passport photo on, which would be more suitable for the elderly who aren't in to technology.

 

I can see it for overseas .... maybe a stamp in a passport from your doctor would suffice.

 

The poll doesn’t make sense. Never in a million years will you need a passport to get a pint of milk, for exactly the same reason you’ve been allowed to go top essential shops throughout the pandemic.

We’re talking about using it to open places that weren’t able to open last summer - the particularly high risk places where there is no ventilation and no chance of social distancing. The sorts of places where if someone is infected they WILL pass it on. Without a doubt there is going to have to be some controls in place in these settings until we’ve vaccinated enough people to reach herd immunity, be that testing or passports.

They questions are:
Should public services (eg libraries) limit access based in immunity status or is this discriminatory?
Should private business (eg theatres, nightclubs) be allowed to determine who comes in based on their immunity status or is this discriminatory?
Should government mandate that private business must check immunity status for the good of the wider population?
Which settings would this be required for and which wouldn’t it be?
Should certain job occupations be required to have the vaccine (eg care workers in care homes)?

 

That seems a logical solution. Many comments on here only seem to consider the domestic situation which is way ahead of most countries Worldwide . Personally I consider a certification system for domestic situations by the time it had been debated, passed in Parliament, and enacted would be rendered superfluous due to the speed at which the population is being vaccinated. International travel IMO is a different matter.
Evidence of vaccination prior to entering other countries. (even Italy France Germany etc) in the short to medium term is desirable partly for their benefit, especially if, as data increasingly suggests the vaccine dramatically limits transmission of the virus. The main reason though is that by introducing such a system domestically the UK can morally and legally justify stricter controls on unvaccinated foreign nationals entering the UK from countries where the vaccination programmes and therefore herd immunity are lagging behind and risk introducing a mutated higher risk virus into the UK. Yes it could be argued that returning UK citizens could equally bring a mutated virus back but the odds are much lower due to the fact in the vast majority of cases they are only abroad for relatively short periods and therefore have less contact with large numbers of people and the vaccine still reduce the likelihood of becoming infected.
So in summary IMO....
Evidence required linked to passport -Yes. Short/medium term (dependent on other countries progress in vaccination)
Evidence required linked to domestic activities - No.
Evidence or quarantine facilities required for foreign Nationals entering UK from countries lagging behind on vaccination rollout Short to medium term -Yes.

 

Well done Nez, try nailing the apostrophe and capitalisation next. It should always be English, never english.

Oh and us pedants absolutely hate "lol".

 

One step at a time.

I'm not an English teacher or have a levels in it

 

I suspect proof of vaccination might be required for international travel - either by the countries concerned *or* (and probably more likely) for travel insurance - remember we no longer have EHIC so will need insurance to travel anywhere abroad from this year. Without proof if you were to become ill abroad you would face some potentially very high costs without insurance - or even if you were asymptomatic and tested positive before coming back and had to remain in the holiday country for an extra week with unexpected hotel and flights costs (could be several thousand £s in peak season). And remember insurance companies will do anything they can to avoid having to pay out.

What do people think about the other way though? - Should all visitors to the UK be required to have a negative test and/or vaccination proof before entering the UK? - or just from countries where it is endemic?

As for a simple stamp in the passport - it'd be too easy to fake and as we've seen with the lanyards for those who can't wear masks too many people would be tempted to fake it

 

.

 

Don't forget they're.

 

It's a tough ethical dilemma isn't it - it seems wrong to implement this measure which basically forces people into getting the vaccine. Everyone should get the vaccine, but it should be their choice to do so. Having said that, it seems like the vaccine passport/ having a test will be necessary for nightclubs etc to open. It could be a disaster otherwise. It's a tough call.

The ethical conundrum is the important issue here, but on the side I'd also be cheesed off if those of us in our twenties aren't allowed into bars but all the oldies (who our lives have been ruined for a year to protect) are the ones who can go out.

 

We have been told all the way through that outdoors is safer. If we have to show proof to get in to Oakwell that will be a pain. Imagine the queues as people get their ticket scanned, get their season pass scanned, show their proof that they have been vaccinated, show proof they have had a negative test and deal with people saying they are exempt.

 

In terms of rules and regulations, and what they mean for the future and the wider concept of liberty and freedom to go about your daily business without intrusion by another, domestic vaccine passports are the most dangerous development in the western world in a long time. And I really do believe they are coming. I really believe you will have to show your certification to go into a supermarket.

Anyone in favour of this nonsense will rue the day. Because they'll evolve. I hope to God that you or your family aren't one day the one's without their papers in order. Or God forbid, when you give others legal powers to discriminate, you won't belong to the 'wrong' group.

 

Never have issue with that one. It was always the other 2