I am ashamed to say that my eyes lit up when they fell on an article in the Sunday newspaper reporting that Tony Blair thinks those who have been vaccinated should be free to roam. Ashamed because momentarily I thought about myself (vaccinated) and I was ever so slightly uplifted by the fact that he appeared to be pushing back on the slow road we are on to freedom. But then it dawned on me. How will people know who has been vaccinated and who has not? Of course, by using the vaccine passport on the NHS app. And thus, we are back to square one.
In the same issue of the newspaper Baron (Dan) Hannan of Kingsclere, who has been arguing against lockdown throughout the pandemic on the basis of the economic damage it is doing also said that on the basis of the vaccine rollout restrictions should be lifted. He did not mention vaccine passports and, as far as I can ascertain, he is not in favour of them. He is certainly very much against all things EU which seems to have developed an obsession with a digital identification system containing all your records in one place. But the combined pressure to vaccinate, the shaming of the unvaccinated and the absolute necessity to lift economic restrictions as soon as possible all make the introduction of vaccine passports domestically more likely. We must face two facts: the government is dithering over restoring our rights on 21 June; and—from personal experience—having the vaccine makes not a jot of difference to your life. I can do nothing more now than before I had my second dose.
The continued vacillation on when restrictions will be lifted is keeping us all in suspense. In less than a month we have had unambiguous statements that, for example, working from home would cease on 21 June to the present situation where working at home may continue indefinitely. Even today there are two contradictory reports about what is likely to happen and both emanating from Secretary of State for ‘Health’ Matt Hancock MP one saying that we are on track and one saying the opposite. As the onslaught of variants seems endless—always more serious if they have a name—the civil service is drawing up plans to put the brakes on the easing of restrictions on 21 June. Some commentators such as Julia Hartley-Brewer, whose lockdown scepticism has developed over the course of the pandemic, say that whatever the government guidance is on 21 June that she is ‘done with it’ and, for example, having obeyed the law to this point will no longer wear a face mask. She believes that the lockdown sceptics are no longer a minority. However, Lionel Shriver, a sceptic from the outset remains horrified at the way people have adapted to lockdown and the accompanying restrictions. She is less than hopeful that we will get out of our predicament or that a great many people even want to.
Judging from the number of people ranging from school children through to older people who wear masks outdoors, I tend to share Shriver’s pessimism. Without clarity, especially over the necessity to wear face masks we will remain a very divided society. If the government do not make a crystal-clear statement regarding face masks and that they are no longer required then the finger-wagging, tut-tutting and shouting directed at the unmasked will continue. The irony here is that it is well known that face masks are probably useless and have many harms associated with them. I only like to make predictions that I hope are wrong. Thus, my prediction for 21 June is that we will see some easing of restrictions but not the ‘freedom day’ that many of us imagined and hope for. Concomitantly, I am almost certain that 21 June will be ‘VP’ day–vaccine passport day. Boris, please prove me wrong.
Opinions from the Unity News Network (UNN) editorial team & various contributors. | UNN always clearly distinguishes between news and opinion pieces and as an open minded outlet we publish views from a variety of people and organisation that do not necessarily reflect the views of UNN or its writers. Articles published under UNN Opinions are always opinion pieces and if published on behalf of a contributor will contain that authors name at the start of the piece.
