If venues wish to impose them that’s their right, in my view, but I think Matthew Parris misses some important points here
He assumes they *are* needed, but why, when vaccine take up has been extraordinarily high and we were told that alone was the route out of lockdown?
He assumes they *are* needed, but why, when vaccine take up has been extraordinarily high and we were told that alone was the route out of lockdown?
https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1381215455898038273
I’ll be getting my jab when offered, because it’ll bring us nearer herd immunity, not because I am esp concerned about my own risks from covid. Uncomfortable with the idea of doing it so we can exclude the very small number who, for whatever reason, don’t wish to be vaccinated
There also might well be an element of semi-coercion in practice e.g. if only venues that impose them are allowed to relax social distancing requirements
If proof of a recent negative test will do, that is certainly a very different proposition, but it would still mean additional headaches for businesses, government mission creep - and again not sure why it would be needed domestically, given the overwhelming vaccine take-up
I’ve yet to hear a convincing case for why we need them. I also don’t get why the Edwina Curries of this world are so het up about the unvaccinated when they’ve already been vaccinated! Don’t they think vaccines work (or understand how inoculation works?)
The social contract is already shot to pieces. In my view the government needs to give bloody good reasons for any further interference in daily life, esp having lied to the public and moved the goalposts so many times. Right now the argument is “Why not?” - it should be “Why?”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
