Vaccine Passports/Permanent restrictions

[NorthKent1989]

America is going down the vaccine passport route, interesting to see what states will enforce it.

Texas and Florida just opened up without further restrictions I can’t see them having vaccine passports, New York is set to role them out.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not sure it’s libertarianism is what you’re talking about, the Vaccine passport and coercion is more authoritarian I would say but I may be wrong

No, it's libertarianism, because individual establishments will be able to make their own choice about freedom of association. There will be no compulsion for pubs or theatres to mandate proof of vaccine for entry; it will simply be up to them. It's just about the most libertarian thing there is, and there's a good reason libertarianism is mostly the preserve of able bodied, middle class white dudes.

 

[35B]

No, it's libertarianism, because individual establishments will be able to make their own choice about freedom of association. There will be no compulsion for pubs or theatres to mandate proof of vaccine for entry; it will simply be up to them. It's just about the most libertarian thing there is, and there's a good reason libertarianism is mostly the preserve of able bodied, middle class white dudes.

Being pedantic, it's not libertarianism, because the libertarian standpoint would allow the individual to make their decision regardless of the feelings of anyone else - including the venue operator. It's why libertarianism has been demonstrated over the last year to belong in the thesaurus as a synonym for selfishness - as would be obvious to anyone who's ever actually thought about what Ayn Rand wrote.

 

[cuccir]

I realize that I'm an anonymous poster on a message board so not the strongest source for this, although you'll see I've been a member here for a long time and do not have a habit of posting bs/gossip.

I have been told by a very reliable source that when they spoke with Chris Whitty last week, Whitty said that he expects the '1m plus social distancing' (ie advice to keep to 2m, or to wear masks where you must be close, with legal capacities on spaces where needed to maintain this) to be advised for public indoor sites in the autumn.

Caveats:

• I was told that Whitty gave this expectation with some hesitancy as a "best guess"
• It was clear that this was the expectation for indoor sites where mixing was likely ie I wouldn't know if it'd apply to offices etc
• Most importantly of course it was Whitty's expectation that this would be the public health advice - whether or not this would be law or guidance would depend on government

I'd very strongly believe my source, but also stress that the source too was clear that Whitty was talking in terms of his personal expectation, rather than giving an official prediction or governmental viewpoint. Nonetheless interesting to know where as a key advisor his thinking is going.

 

[chris11256]

I realize that I'm an anonymous poster on a message board so not the strongest source for this, although you'll see I've been a member here for a long time and do not have a habit of posting bs/gossip.

I have been told by a very reliable source that when they spoke with Chris Whitty last week, Whitty said that he expects the '1m plus social distancing' (ie advice to keep to 2m, or to wear masks where you must be close, with legal capacities on spaces where needed to maintain this) to be advised for public indoor sites in the autumn.

Caveats:

• I was told that Whitty gave this expectation with some hesitancy as a "best guess"
• It was clear that this was the expectation for indoor sites where mixing was likely ie I wouldn't know if it'd apply to offices etc
• Most importantly of course it was Whitty's expectation that this would be the public health advice - whether or not this would be law or guidance would depend on government

I'd very strongly believe my source, but also stress that the source too was clear that Whitty was talking in terms of his personal expectation, rather than giving an official prediction or governmental viewpoint. Nonetheless interesting to know where as a key advisor his thinking is going.

I assume this is where vaccine passports come into play, IE If business X wants to be open without social distancing then they have to require negative test or proof of vacicnation.

But If vaccination is a success and cases are minimal, then I don't see the need. By that time all adults with have been offered two doses.

 

[Bantamzen]

I realize that I'm an anonymous poster on a message board so not the strongest source for this, although you'll see I've been a member here for a long time and do not have a habit of posting bs/gossip.

I have been told by a very reliable source that when they spoke with Chris Whitty last week, Whitty said that he expects the '1m plus social distancing' (ie advice to keep to 2m, or to wear masks where you must be close, with legal capacities on spaces where needed to maintain this) to be advised for public indoor sites in the autumn.

Caveats:

• I was told that Whitty gave this expectation with some hesitancy as a "best guess"
• It was clear that this was the expectation for indoor sites where mixing was likely ie I wouldn't know if it'd apply to offices etc
• Most importantly of course it was Whitty's expectation that this would be the public health advice - whether or not this would be law or guidance would depend on government

I'd very strongly believe my source, but also stress that the source too was clear that Whitty was talking in terms of his personal expectation, rather than giving an official prediction or governmental viewpoint. Nonetheless interesting to know where as a key advisor his thinking is going.

Its a good job Whitty isn't a member of the cabinet, prime minister, or a member of Parliament. He can have all the expectations he wants, but what happens in the wider world is not for him to decide.

 

[kristiang85]

I realize that I'm an anonymous poster on a message board so not the strongest source for this, although you'll see I've been a member here for a long time and do not have a habit of posting bs/gossip.

I have been told by a very reliable source that when they spoke with Chris Whitty last week, Whitty said that he expects the '1m plus social distancing' (ie advice to keep to 2m, or to wear masks where you must be close, with legal capacities on spaces where needed to maintain this) to be advised for public indoor sites in the autumn.

Caveats:

• I was told that Whitty gave this expectation with some hesitancy as a "best guess"
• It was clear that this was the expectation for indoor sites where mixing was likely ie I wouldn't know if it'd apply to offices etc
• Most importantly of course it was Whitty's expectation that this would be the public health advice - whether or not this would be law or guidance would depend on government

I'd very strongly believe my source, but also stress that the source too was clear that Whitty was talking in terms of his personal expectation, rather than giving an official prediction or governmental viewpoint. Nonetheless interesting to know where as a key advisor his thinking is going.

THanks for the info. Just to clarify - you say in the autumn, does this mean that there will be no distancing rules after June 21st but it will be brought back in September?

Also - assuming this is the true state of his current thoughts - on a day where there is such great vaccine data coming out of the US, it is great to see how much faith our CMO has in the programme. Not. Hopefully he will be given the promise of his knighthood and asked to quietly move into the shadows whilst the rest of us get on with rebuilding the country.

 

[Class 33]

Its a good job Whitty isn't a member of the cabinet, prime minister, or a member of Parliament. He can have all the expectations he wants, but what happens in the wider world is not for him to decide.

Indeed. The government doesn't have to do what he says. He can bugger off if he's expecting social distancing to return again in the autumn! That would mean many thousands of businesses in trouble again and a fair number going under, having to bring back the furlough scheme again, causing mental health problems again, etc! We can't just bring back social distancing for some silly inane reasons. Come 21st June(and ideally it should be before that really) we really need to be saying absolutely good riddance once and for all to this social distancing nonsense and all the severe problems it's caused over the past 15 months. Good riddance social distancing, you won't be coming back again!

 

[cuccir]

Just to clarify - you say in the autumn, does this mean that there will be no distancing rules after June 21st but it will be brought back in September?

Good question - was specifically discussing in relation to planning for activities from September onwards. No implications either way for the summer.

 

[Darandio]

THanks for the info. Just to clarify - you say in the autumn, does this mean that there will be no distancing rules after June 21st but it will be brought back in September?

Also - assuming this is the true state of his current thoughts - on a day where there is such great vaccine data coming out of the US, it is great to see how much faith our CMO has in the programme. Not. Hopefully he will be given the promise of his knighthood and asked to quietly move into the shadows whilst the rest of us get on with rebuilding the country.

Clearly the 'no flu this winter so we can beat it again next' brigade are starting to have an effect on him.

 

[yorksrob]

The worry is that if they think that they can reimpose social distancing over winter with the adult population vaccinated, what other unwelcome restrictions will they dredge up.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The worry is that if they think that they can reimpose social distancing over winter with the adult population vaccinated, what other unwelcome restrictions will they dredge up.

I think by then most people would have had enough, we’ve sort of reached that stage now

 

[AlterEgo]

Being pedantic, it's not libertarianism, because the libertarian standpoint would allow the individual to make their decision regardless of the feelings of anyone else - including the venue operator. It's why libertarianism has been demonstrated over the last year to belong in the thesaurus as a synonym for selfishness - as would be obvious to anyone who's ever actually thought about what Ayn Rand wrote.

No contemporary libertarian thinks they should be allowed to enter private property under their own rules. That's anarchism, which is subtly different.

 

[35B]

No contemporary libertarian thinks they should be allowed to enter private property under their own rules. That's anarchism, which is subtly different.

Noted. I suspect that many self proclaimed “libertarians” fail to grasp the difference, and are better considered “selfisharians”

 

[Class 33]

The worry is that if they think that they can reimpose social distancing over winter with the adult population vaccinated, what other unwelcome restrictions will they dredge up.

I wouldn't worry too much about this actually happening. Because unless something really disastrous happens like some variants that defy the vaccines and the hospital numbers and deaths really start surging out of control again, then I just really can't see them re-imposing social distancing restrictions all over again. This would also mean bringing back limits on numbers in shops again, one way systems all over again, black and yellow hazzard tapes all over again, perspex screens all over again, along with all the severe damage it would do to thousands of businesses all over again. The likes of nightclubs, theatres, cinemas, etc would have to close down again. It would do absolute catastrophic damage all over again. And all this for some silly inane reasons such as "to keep us safe just in case"? Nope, I really really can not see this happening. 21st June and we should be saying good bloody riddance to social distancing. Those who want to continue socially distancing can do so on their own if they so wish. The vast vast majority of people will be glad to see the back of this nonsense.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I wouldn't worry too much about this actually happening. Because unless something really disastrous happens like some variants that defy the vaccines and the hospital numbers and deaths really start surging out of control again, then I just really can't see them re-imposing social distancing restrictions all over again. This would also mean bringing back limits on numbers in shops again, one way systems all over again, black and yellow hazzard tapes all over again, perspex screens all over again, along with all the severe damage it would do to thousands of businesses all over again. The likes of nightclubs, theatres, cinemas, etc would have to close down again. It would do absolute catastrophic damage all over again. And all this for some silly inane reasons such as "to keep us safe just in case"? Nope, I really really can not see this happening. 21st June and we should be saying good bloody riddance to social distancing. Those who want to continue socially distancing can do so on their own if they so wish. The vast vast majority of people will be glad to see the back of this nonsense.

Personally I won’t be happy until domestic vaccine passports have been binned as a unworkable concept, it’s barely working in Israel, I doubt it’ll work here, or be enforced, the USA is introducing them but Florida has already confirmed it won’t use them, domestic passports would be a needless continuation of this mess

 

[MikeWM]

Noted. I suspect that many self proclaimed “libertarians” fail to grasp the difference, and are better considered “selfisharians”

I think the issue with 'libertarianism' here is that, like most other such political terms, it encompasses a rather wide range of views - from Corbynites who advocate very strong liberties for the individual but strong controls on businesses and money; through to people such as the Libertarian Party in the USA, who are most concerned about letting businesses do whatever they will and are less concerned about the individual. (In Political Compass terms, from the 'bottom-left' quadrant through to the 'bottom-right' quadrant).

Clearly I am in the the former camp rather than the latter. The latter has far too many obvious problems (for a trivial example, totally unfettered businesses lead to monopolies and/or cartels, which I think most people would agree are undesirable). That's why I would far rather it wasn't just the latter camp who are calling all out all of this mess - I'm not exactly delighted to be agreeing with people like the AIER - but for some reason that's where we are right now.

--

They’ll say no to both, bosses won’t want the hassle either way, I recall the restrictions back in Autumn last year when pubs had to put a limit on how many could enter and more often than not in resulted in a argument in which in the end the door staff would relent and let people in, both outcomes means somewhere down the line they lose custom and business will go elsewhere.

I'm not sure why you think they'd be allowed to have the choice - it isn't like the Government have been listening to the wishes of hospitality for the last 12 months, why would they start now? If my suspicions are correct and the 'papers please' are the endgame, there will be very strict rules put in place to enforce it (in the same way there are now strict rules about underage drinking).

 

[NorthKent1989]

I think the issue with 'libertarianism' here is that, like most other such political terms, it encompasses a rather wide range of views - from Corbynites who advocate very strong liberties for the individual but strong controls on businesses and money; through to people such as the Libertarian Party in the USA, who are most concerned about letting businesses do whatever they will and are less concerned about the individual. (In Political Compass terms, from the 'bottom-left' quadrant through to the 'bottom-right' quadrant).

Clearly I am in the the former camp rather than the latter. The latter has far too many obvious problems (for a trivial example, totally unfettered businesses lead to monopolies and/or cartels, which I think most people would agree are undesirable). That's why I would far rather it wasn't just the latter camp who are calling all out all of this mess - I'm not exactly delighted to be agreeing with people like the AIER - but for some reason that's where we are right now.

--



I'm not sure why you think they'd be allowed to have the choice - it isn't like the Government have been listening to the wishes of hospitality for the last 12 months, why would they start now? If my suspicions are correct and the 'papers please' are the endgame, there will be very strict rules put in place to enforce it (in the same way there are now strict rules about underage drinking).

Then hospitality is dead then.

And so are any party that backs this

 

[MikeWM]

Then hospitality is dead then.

And so are any party that backs this

The Guardian (ugh) seems to say this is where we're going

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-charm-offensive-over-covid-passport-scheme

Michael Gove has launched a charm offensive to persuade sceptical MPs to back a domestic Covid passport scheme, the strongest indication yet that the government intends to press ahead with the plan.

MPs believe the scheme, under which venues such as pubs could be asked to see proof of vaccination or recent tests before allowing entry, could even be included in the Queen’s speech, making it more difficult for MPs to oppose.

...

MPs who attended the meetings said Labour’s Hilary Benn and John Spellar, who were also invited, appeared open to backing the plans, as did the SNP, though the Lib Dems’ chief whip Alistair Carmichael said his party would be forcefully opposed.

...

Venues are likely to be allowed to relax social distancing rules if they check Covid certification on the door.

(bold mine)

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

The Guardian (ugh) seems to say this is where we're going

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-charm-offensive-over-covid-passport-scheme

(bold mine)

And of course...

MPs who attended the meetings said Labour’s Hilary Benn and John Spellar, who were also invited, appeared open to backing the plans, as did the SNP, though the Lib Dems’ chief whip Alistair Carmichael said his party would be forcefully opposed.

What a spineless opposition we have.

At least the Lib Dem's are fairly opposed to it, but they don't get much of a say these days.

 

[Yew]

But If vaccination is a success and cases are minimal, then I don't see the need. By that time all adults with have been offered two doses.

Cases are irrelevant in the context of such massive numbers of vaccines.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, the local elections in May are the best opportunity for the public to issue a corrective instruction to the Tory and Labour parties.

 

[bramling]

Well, the local elections in May are the best opportunity for the public to issue a corrective instruction to the Tory and Labour parties.

An opportunity I will certainly be taking up.

I haven’t decided whether it will be a fringe candidate or spoiled paper, but it will be one or the other.

 

[yorksrob]

An opportunity I will certainly be taking up.

I haven’t decided whether it will be a fringe candidate or spoiled paper, but it will be one or the other.

I expect a spoiled ballot paper will be the only option for me.

 

[kristiang85]

The Guardian (ugh) seems to say this is where we're going

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-charm-offensive-over-covid-passport-scheme

(bold mine)

The man is just the human embodiment of a constant lie.

 

[DustyBin]

The man is just the human embodiment of a constant lie.

I've never liked Gove one bit, and I say that as a (C)conservative.

 

[35B]

I think the issue with 'libertarianism' here is that, like most other such political terms, it encompasses a rather wide range of views - from Corbynites who advocate very strong liberties for the individual but strong controls on businesses and money; through to people such as the Libertarian Party in the USA, who are most concerned about letting businesses do whatever they will and are less concerned about the individual. (In Political Compass terms, from the 'bottom-left' quadrant through to the 'bottom-right' quadrant).

Clearly I am in the the former camp rather than the latter. The latter has far too many obvious problems (for a trivial example, totally unfettered businesses lead to monopolies and/or cartels, which I think most people would agree are undesirable). That's why I would far rather it wasn't just the latter camp who are calling all out all of this mess - I'm not exactly delighted to be agreeing with people like the AIER - but for some reason that's where we are right now.

There are problems with all points on that compass - but I'd note that the "bottom left" quadrant tend to be strongly correlated with statist economics, so I struggle with applying the term "libertarian" to that quadrant where it's used as a descriptor for what economic activity is allowed.

 

[Mintona]

Would be amazed if indoor venues such as cinemas and theatres don’t mandate masks for the foreseeable future (ie. 12 months), and wouldn’t surprise me if outdoor venues such as football stadia do too.

 

[takno]

The man is just the human embodiment of a constant lie.

In fairness to him, I think he's honestly repeating what he's been told. He's just relentlessly incapable of realising that he's Boris's pet toad. Sending Gove out to talk to the press and then humiliating him by openly contradicting him the next day seems to be one of Boris's few remaining thrills.

 

[yorksrob]

Would be amazed if indoor venues such as cinemas and theatres don’t mandate masks through the winter, and wouldn’t surprise me if outdoor venues such as football stadia do too.

For the few non-league games we were able to watch last year we had social distancing in the stand and masks while walking around the ground.

I'm struggling to see any justification for it after mass-vaccination.