(Orkney
and Shetland) (LD)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if
he will make a statement on the Government plans for covid
vaccine passports.
The Minister for Covid Vaccine Deployment ()
Our vaccination programme has given this nation a wall of
protection against this deadly virus. Data from Public Health
England estimates that two doses of a covid-19 vaccine offers
protection of around 96% against hospitalisation and that our
jabs have prevented over 100,000 deaths, over 143,000
hospitalisations and around 24 million infections. It is this
protection that allowed us to carefully ease restrictions over
the past few months. However, we must do so in a way that is
mindful of the benefits that both doses of the vaccine can bring.
On 19 July, the Prime Minister announced that
“by the end of September—when all over 18s will have had the
chance to be double jabbed—we are planning to make full
vaccination the condition of entry to nightclubs and other venues
where large crowds gather. Proof of a negative test will no
longer be sufficient.”
We will be confirming more details in due course.
This approach is designed to reduce transmission and serious
illness. It is in line with the approach we have taken on
international travel, where different rules apply depending on
whether someone has had both jabs.
I would like to end by urging people to come forward to get the
jab. Some 88% of people have had one jab and more than 80% of
people aged 16 and over have now had the protection of both
doses. It is the best way to protect yourself, your loved ones
and your community, so please come forward and join them, and
make our wall of protection even stronger.
Mr Carmichael
First, thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to ask this urgent
question; as Big Brother Watch brings its campaign against
vaccine passports to Westminster today, it is certainly timely.
The introduction of vaccine passports will have enormous
practical implications for the literally thousands of businesses
across the country that will be required to gather and to hold
our data. It is on those aspects that the answers are most
urgently required from the Government—this must not be “in due
course”, as the Minister has just said. The deadline for the
implementation of this scheme is now just three weeks away. We
must not, however, lose sight of the fact that a scheme of this
sort opens the door to a major change in the relationship between
the citizen and the state. Never before in peacetime have a
Government in this country controlled, in this way, where we can
go and with whom, and what to do. If the Government have
concluded that this now has to change, at the very least this
House must have a chance to make its voice heard and its views
known. So when will we get the vote that the Minister promised us
before the recess?
The case for vaccine passports is riddled with inconsistencies.
Nightclubs have been open since July and, notwithstanding recent
events in Aberdeen, they have been relatively safe. If they are
safe today for people to enjoy responsibly, what do the
Government expect to change between now and the end of the month?
On Monday the Minister told me at the Dispatch Box:
“We do know that 60% of people who have had two jabs will not
become infected with the Delta variant and therefore cannot
infect someone else, although 40% will and can.”—[Official
Report, 6 September 2021; Vol. 700, c. 75.]
The 40% figure highlights one of the biggest dangers of the whole
idea: taking people into large social gatherings where they think
they will be safe from infection but in fact they are not. The
Minister will know that there will always be some who cannot be
vaccinated, so if entry to nightclubs or events is to be
dependent on demonstrating vaccination, those people will be
excluded. So can he tell the House: what assessment have the
Government done with regard to their duties under equalities
legislation? A study by the Night Time Industries Association
found that 69% of its members view the introduction of vaccine
passports as having a negative impact on business, and 70% said
they were not necessary for opening their business. Why are the
Government not listening to the experts in the industry? When
will nightclubs and other businesses be told how will they be
expected to check the vaccine status of their patrons? What legal
authority will they have to do that and what will the
consequences be for them if they do not do it?
On 12 July, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
told the House:
“As we move away from regulations, there will no longer be a
legal requirement for any establishment to have covid vaccine
certification”.—[Official Report, 12 July 2021; Vol. 699, c. 32.]
When did that change and why?
I am grateful for the right hon. Gentleman’s questions and I will
attempt to address them. I will begin by saying to the House that
no one in this Government, and certainly not this Prime
Minister—it is not in his DNA—wants to curtail people’s freedoms
or require people to show a piece of paper before they enter a
nightclub. The reason we are moving forward on this is that we
have looked at what has happened in other countries, where
nightclubs were opening and then shutting again, and opening and
then shutting again, and we want to avoid that disruption and
maintain sectors that can add to people’s enjoyment of life and
dance, as was the case for the Chancellor of the Duchy of
Lancaster. We want them to be able to do that sustainably.
The reason behind the end of September date, which the right hon.
Gentleman asked about, is that by then all 18-year-olds and above
will have had the chance to have two doses.
The right hon. Gentleman was quite right when he quoted what I
said to him at the Dispatch Box a few days ago: 60% of people who
are doubled vaccinated will not be infected and therefore will
not spread the infection, but 40% may do. The view of our
clinical experts is that the additional relative safety of people
having to be doubled vaccinated before they can enter a nightclub
does begin to mitigate super-spreader events, which could cause
us, in effect, to take a decision to close nightclubs, which we
would not want to do.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the disruption to business;
as he will know, this is a tried and tested solution that has
been used extensively throughout the Government’s events research
programme. It requires venues to check or scan the NHS covid
pass, in the same way as nightclub bouncers check ID before
entry.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the equality impact
assessment. I assure him that we conducted a full equality impact
assessment and consulted widely to understand the potential
equality impact of covid status certification. We spoke to
ethicists and representatives of disabilities, race and faith
groups. The system allows both digital and non-digital proofs, to
help to ensure access for all. Constituents who do not have a
smartphone, for example, can confirm their vaccine status by
calling 119 and getting proof via email or written letter.
As I say, this is not something we do lightly; it is something to
allow us to transition this virus from pandemic to endemic
status. We are coming towards the winter months, when there will
be upward pressure of infections because of the return to school
and winter. Large gatherings of people, especially in indoor
venues such as nightclubs, could add to that. The mitigation
against that, to allow us to transition the virus from pandemic
to endemic status, is the booster programme that I hope we will
embark upon later this month, after the final recommendations
from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation.
(Hazel Grove) (Con)
What a load of rubbish. I do not believe that my hon. Friend
believes a word he just uttered, because I remember him stating
very persuasively my position, which we shared at the time, that
this measure would be discriminatory. Yet he is sent to the
Dispatch Box to defend the indefensible. We in this House seem
prepared to have a needless fight over this issue. It is
completely unnecessary. We all agree that people should be
encouraged to have the vaccine, and I again encourage everybody
to do so, but to go down this route, which is overtly
discriminatory, will be utterly damaging to the fabric of
society.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has made his view clear to
me on many occasions. It pains me to have to take a step like
this, which we do not take lightly, but the flipside to that is
that if we do not and the virus causes super-spreader events in
nightclubs and I have to stand at the Dispatch Box and announce
to the House that we have to close the sector, that would be much
more painful to me.
(Ashton-under-Lyne) (Lab)
I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr
Carmichael) for bringing this important topic to the House.
I associate myself with the Minister’s opening remarks regarding
vaccine uptake. It is incredibly important that people take up
the vaccine where possible, and I reiterate that from the
Opposition Dispatch Box.
We are weeks away from implementation, but while Ministers were
relaxing over the summer, there was no clarity from the
Government about these plans. Businesses remain anxious. Our
priorities are clear: to protect the NHS and our economy. We
absolutely cannot be faced with an unmanageable winter crisis for
both. My first question to the Minister is really simple: what
does he think this will achieve? How and when will the UK
Government decide which businesses must implement vaccine
certification, and will they rely on low-paid staff at venues to
act as public health officials, and what support will they be
getting?
The NHS covid pass application currently allows individuals in
England to either input a negative test result or complete a
vaccine record. That is important for those who cannot, for
legitimate medical reasons, take the vaccine. Will the Minister
explain why the Government plan to drop the negative test option?
Will they improve and keep available the NHS covid pass
application or will it be replaced or outsourced?
Let me be crystal clear: we cannot support any potential covid
pass scheme for access to everyday services. Can the Minister
categorically assure me that no one will be required to have a
covid vaccination pass to access essential services?
This Government have dithered, dawdled, and, as some have said,
dad danced away the summer. They have not planned or prepared,
and they have not provided the reassurances or presented a clear
path forward. UK businesses have had a hell of an 18 months
during this difficult pandemic. They need a proactive, supportive
Government, and it is about time that Ministers worked towards
that aim.
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her opening words and for
urging those who have not had a vaccine to come forward and be
protected. She asked a number of important questions relating to
this measure, including what it will achieve. She will know that
double vaccination was important for people to be able to travel,
and the implementation of that was largely successful. We need to
go further to make sure that we recognise other vaccines from
other countries around the world. Those vaccines need to be
recognised by the WHO, our regulator and other regulators to make
it even easier for people who are double vaccinated to travel to
the United Kingdom. The NHS in England, Scotland, Wales and
Northern Ireland stands ready to continue that joint work, as
does NHSX in terms of the technology.
The hon. Lady asked about people’s access to essential settings,
which is incredibly important. I can assure her that some
essential services will not require people to show covid vaccine
certification. They include settings that have stayed open
throughout the pandemic, such as public sector buildings,
essential retail, essential services and, of course, public
transport.
She also asked what certification will achieve domestically. I
hope that, combined with the vaccination programme, the booster
programme and all the work that we have done around education, we
will be able to transition this virus, post winter, from pandemic
to endemic status. The reason for this very difficult decision is
that it allows us to sustain the opening of the economy,
including the nightclub sector, without having to flip-flop, go
backwards and close down sectors because of super-spreader
events. The chief medical officer, , tells us that
in absolute terms. As I said earlier, if people are double
jabbed, only 60% will not be infected by the virus and therefore
not spread it, but 40% could be infected. In relative terms,
putting that downward pressure on infection rates is important in
that journey towards transition from pandemic to endemic.
(Forest of Dean) (Con)
I have to say that I agree with the Chairman of the Public
Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, my hon.
Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Mr Wragg). The Minister set
out earlier this year that this policy was discriminatory. He was
right then and that remains the case. It is a discriminatory
policy. The vaccines are fantastically effective at reducing
hospitalisation and death. They are very much less effective in
reducing transmission of the Delta variant. This is a pointless
policy with damaging effects. I am afraid that the Minister is
picking an unnecessary fight with his own colleagues. I say to
him that the Government should think again. The Leader of the
House has been clear that we do not believe—the Government do not
believe—that this policy is necessary for us to meet here in a
crowded place. Let us not have one rule for Members of Parliament
and another rule for everybody else. Drop this policy.
My right hon. Friend asks about my previous position. I addressed
it a few days ago from this Dispatch Box. Back in January and
February, we did not have the level of evidence on the Delta
variant, which he mentioned. That variant is far more
infectious—it requires only a few particles of Delta for a person
to be infectious. Let me repeat the data that I cited earlier:
60% of people who are double vaccinated will not be infected by
Delta and therefore will not spread it, but 40% could be infected
and then spread it.
As for the policy being discriminatory, there will, of course, be
exemptions—for example, in exceptional circumstances where a
clinician recommends vaccine deferral, where that vaccine is not
appropriate, and where testing is also not recommended on
clinical grounds. Then there are those who have received a trial
vaccine, including those who have been blinded or given a placebo
as part of the formally approved covid vaccine trials in the
United Kingdom.
This is not something that we enter into lightly, but it is part
of our armoury to help us transition over the winter months from
pandemic to endemic status. I hope to be able to stand at this
Dispatch Box very soon after that and be able to share with the
House that we do not need to do this any more as we will be
dealing with the virus through an annual vaccination programme.
(Dundee East) (SNP)
I pay tribute to all those involved in the vaccination programme.
It has been extraordinary. In Scotland, we have 4.1 million
adults with a first dose and almost 4 million with a second dose,
which means that north of 90% of all adults have had at least one
dose. It is a fantastic result across the UK since last December,
but the pandemic is not over. Lives are still at risk and the
pressures on the NHS are very real, so we in Scotland are
introducing a vaccine passport, but, broadly, it will be limited
to nightclubs, outdoor standing events with more than 4,000
people and any event with more than 10,000 people. While the
rules in England may be slightly different, I hope that they are
as proportionate as that.
May I go back to the issue of essential services? It is not
enough simply to say that a person will not need a vaccine
passport to get an essential service. It has to be any setting
where a person’s attendance is unavoidable—shops, public
transport, medical services and education. We need the
confirmation that no setting where a person’s attendance is
unavoidable will require a vaccine passport.
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his excellent citation of
the vaccine success in Scotland. NHS Scotland has done a
tremendous job, as has the NHS in Wales, Northern Ireland and, of
course, England. He raises an important point about essential
services. In the process of parliamentary engagement and
scrutiny, we will be able to share the detail of that in due
course.
(Staffordshire
Moorlands) (Con)
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Minister, who is defending a
policy that I do not think his heart is truly in. May I ask him a
technical question? If a fake vaccine passport is used, who will
bear responsibility? Will it be the venue, the person who checked
it, or the individual who used the fake passport? Who will police
it? Will we be asking our local police, our local authority or
some other agency?
My right hon. Friend asks an important question. When I or a
Minister from the Cabinet Office stands at the Dispatch Box and
shares the detail of the implementation, we will address that
issue in full.
(Feltham and Heston) (Lab/Co-op)
The Night Time Industries Association and others have expressed
concerns about the practical implementation of this policy. As
the Minister has highlighted, those questions remain and need to
be answered quickly. Will the Minister also publish clear
guidance on which events and venues will require a covid
passport? There will also be increased costs for businesses at a
time when they are recovering, so will they also be getting extra
funding, and when will that be announced?
Absolutely, we will issue clear guidance about venues. Nightclubs
are a particular concern when it comes to evidence from other
countries of super-spreader events, but, absolutely, we will do
that.
(New Forest West) (Con)
Isn’t the super-spreader event the spread of illiberal,
discriminatory and coercive policies from this Dispatch Box?
It pains me to have to stand at the Dispatch Box and implement
something that goes against the DNA of this Minister and his
Prime Minister, but we are living through difficult and
unprecedented times. As one of the major economies of the world,
our four nations have done an incredible job of implementing the
vaccination programme. This is a precautionary measure to ensure
that we can sustainably maintain the opening of all sectors of
the economy.
(Twickenham) (LD)
I almost feel sorry for the Minister because he really is
struggling to defend this policy. However, he has failed to
answer the fundamental question posed by my right hon. Friend the
Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) about this deeply
illiberal, discriminatory and unnecessary policy: will this House
get a vote on the implementation of covid vaccine passports—yes
or no?
There will be appropriate parliamentary scrutiny, as I have said
today and in the past.
Karl MᶜCartney (Lincoln) (Con)
I fear that my hon. Friend is on a sticky wicket. Let me point
out to him that, if people have had covid but have not had any
vaccinations, they will not get the passport that he is proposing
and therefore will not be allowed into nightclubs. We are a
proud, liberal party in that we believe in freedoms; whatever
happened to a laissez-faire attitude? Nightclubs have been open
since July. My hon. Friend has not closed them yet. There is no
need for a vaccine passport.
That is an important question. My hon. Friend is quite right that
nightclubs have been open since July. The end of September date
was chosen deliberately to allow over-18s to have the opportunity
to be double vaccinated. On people who may have had covid and not
had the vaccine, there is evidence—for example, on the beta
variant—that it can be much more harmful to people unless they
get vaccinated. I urge people who have had covid and recovered to
get the vaccine, get double jabbed and get protected.
Mr Speaker
Let us hear from the former voice of the DJs of the north—Jeff
Smith.
(Manchester, Withington) (Lab)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. As somebody who worked in nightclubs for
25-plus years, let me tell the Minister that this is a recipe for
chaos on the doors of nightclubs. As my hon. Friend the Member
for Feltham and Heston () said—and as I said to the Minister the other
day—the Night Time Industries Association has said that this will
cripple the industry. This industry has been massively hard hit
and it relies on walk-up trade; this is going make it impossible
for nightclubs to run.
Let me ask the Minister two questions. First, how does he define
a nightclub, as opposed to a late bar with a DJ playing music?
Secondly, there is no rationale for this—as the hon. Member for
Lincoln (Karl MᶜCartney) said, nightclubs have been open for
weeks—so why close them now? Why require vaccine passport for
nightclubs, as opposed to other crowded indoor venues, such as
the Chamber and the voting Lobby of the House of Commons?
That is an important question. As I said earlier, part of the
trials gave us the confidence that we can do this and do it well.
These passports have already been implemented for international
travel and other countries in Europe have them for nightclubs. We
think this is the right thing to do to help us transition the
virus from pandemic to endemic status. We will be coming forward
with the details for parliamentary scrutiny in due course.
Mr Speaker
I call the voice of pirate radio—Michael Fabricant.
(Lichfield) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Although I understand the libertarian
argument regarding this policy and the very good points put
forward by the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr
Carmichael), is it not the prime duty of any Government to
protect their own population, whether in peace or war? And in
many ways, are we not in a unique war with this virus? The
passport is easily available. I have it on my iPhone now,
although it shows my date of birth, which I would rather it did
not do. I certainly agree, by the way, that if we want equality,
we should be using these passports to get access to this Chamber,
because it is also a crowded place. Will not the vaccine passport
also encourage more people to get double vaccinated?
I agree with my hon. Friend that there is a very strong
libertarian argument and not one with which I would disagree.
This is a difficult and important decision. As he says, we are
still not in a place where I can stand here and say, hand on
heart, that we have transitioned this virus and that it is no
longer a pandemic. That is why we are having to take this
decision. I slightly disagree with his latter point; public
buildings should obviously remain accessible and open to all
without these passports, because there are relative measures that
we can take to allow us the additional protection as we head
towards the booster programme.
(Rhondda) (Lab)
Mr Speaker, I am feeling sheepish about earlier; my
apologies—touché.
This is just nonsense. I am 100% in favour of vaccination and
100% opposed to vaccine passports. There is no legal definition
of what a nightclub is, as opposed to a place where other people
might be bouncing up and down, and shouting at one another across
a Chamber in a room of 500 people. There is no legal definition
that the Minister is going to be able to rely on. The Government
will effectively be turning bouncers on the door into legal
officers, who will be deciding whether somebody has had a placebo
or not. This is for the birds. We can relieve the Minister of all
his pain; he just has to say that he has thought again and he is
not going to do it.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for his question. Bouncers will
not have to decide if someone has had a placebo or not, because
anyone who has been on a trial will be deemed to be vaccinated
and will receive their certificate.
Even though they’re not?
I said this at the Dispatch Box before recess. Actually, the
Secretary of State took to the World Health Organisation a plea
to the rest of the world that people in trials should be
considered fully vaccinated, whether they have had the placebo or
otherwise, in order to encourage them to come forward for vaccine
trials. I repeated that today. It will not be an issue for
nightclub bouncers.
(North East
Bedfordshire) (Con)
The measures presented by the Minister today are unsupportable
because they are bereft of any rationale. I ask him to think
carefully about whether this Government wish to take powers that
were deemed to be emergency powers and make them the normal
powers of a Government in a free society. I, for one, think that
that is extremely unwise and that there is no case for this.
I agree with my hon. Friend that the times that we are enduring
are not normal. This is a measure that we are having to take. As
he will hear from our chief medical officers in England,
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, this is a mitigation to
allow us to continue to transition this pandemic over the winter
months and not have to reverse our policies. I say, with a heavy
heart, that I would much rather stand here and take from
colleagues arrows in the back—or in the front—than come back to
this House and have to close down nightclubs because the virus
has caused a super-spreader event. I do not want to have to
explain that to the whole industry, because it would be much more
detrimental to businesses to have to open and shut them, and open
and shut them again.
(Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) (Lab)
The Minister cannot underestimate how much freedom has been
limited for those with medical exemptions. I have heard from some
of my constituents that they feared even leaving the house. The
idea that they will see those freedoms limited again is
abhorrent, so how can the Minister ensure that the medically
exempt will not have further restrictions on their freedoms
because of his vaccine passport plan?
We have spent a lot of time, energy and resource on ensuring that
those with medical exemptions, who have underlying medical
conditions, were prioritised in both category 4 and 6 of phase 1
of the vaccination programme, as the hon. Member will recall. The
Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has gone further
for the immunosuppressed. As I said earlier, there will be
exemptions from this particular set of rules for people who, for
whatever reason, cannot be vaccinated or cannot have a test for
medical conditions.
(Bolton
West) (Con)
Will my hon. Friend confirm that the duration of these passports,
whether they are passed by the Government or it is done by a
vote, would only last as long as it is considered that the United
Kingdom was in a pandemic state, not an endemic state, in terms
of the disease? Will he also set out when that transition happens
so that we can judge and understand it for ourselves?
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s thoughtful question. There is
great difficulty with knowing at what stage we feel confident
that the virus has transitioned from pandemic to endemic. We have
now entered a period of equilibrium with the virus because of the
success of the vaccination programme. The upward pressure on
infections is obviously schools going back. The downward pressure
on infections will be the booster programme and mitigating
policies like the one we are debating. The Government certainly
do not see this as a long-term power grab to restrict people’s
liberties.
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
I feel I should try to help the Minister by thanking him for the
regular briefings on vaccination uptake over the recess, which
was very helpful to me in terms of encouraging a number of people
from the BME communities to take up the vaccine. However, this
policy is not going to work in Vauxhall. A number of businesses
that have been hampered over the last 18 months want to get back.
A number of those businesses are fearful of the looming rent
increases for private commercial tenants. A number of businesses
are fearful about the backlog of business rates that they have to
pay. We are now probably going to ask those same businesses to
pay to implement this policy. I want to go back to the issue
raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston
(): what funding will be available to those businesses
and when will they receive it?
I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s kind words about the engagement
that we have maintained throughout the vaccine deployment
programme. We will continue to do so, by the way, as we enter the
booster programme, which, in some weeks, will hopefully break all
records that we set in phase 1 of the vaccination programme. I
think what is more detrimental to businesses in Vauxhall is
having to open and shut, and open and shut again. The reason for
this policy is to sustain their ability to trade, and hopefully
trade profitably.
(Derbyshire Dales) (Con)
I think we all agree that vaccine take-up among the young is
essential. What additional incentives can you offer the young
people I work with on Hurst Farm, a social housing estate in
Matlock, to take up the vaccine?
Young people have been coming forward in droves to be vaccinated.
We have walk-in centres all around the country where people do
not even have to book an appointment. There have been many
different ideas for incentivisation of young people. The great
incentive, I hope, is to protect themselves, their families and
their community, but also to enjoy the freedoms that come with
double vaccination.
Mr Speaker
Can I just say that I will not be giving any incentives? When the
hon. Lady said “you”, it meant me, and I definitely do not want
to do that.
(Warley)
(Lab)
As the Minister has indicated, many countries are already
introducing checks in hospitality and entertainment venues, and a
large number of our own citizens are visiting them on holiday,
showing vaccine passes issued free by Her Majesty’s Government
and having already undergone checks at airports. I have been
arguing since February for the introduction of vaccine passes in
order to save venues and jobs. To ensure that they can stay open,
will he now cut through the hysteria and get on with it?
Yes.
(Colne Valley) (Con)
On Sunday, I joined dozens of volunteers for a thank you event
with Medicare Pharmacy for the 58,000 jabs that it has delivered
to local people this year. What more, though, can the Minister do
to encourage—I stress the word “encourage”—those who are still to
have their jab to come forward and do so?
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s work. He has been a champion
of the vaccination programme and I am grateful to Medicare
Pharmacy. We continue to have pop-ups at universities and
walk-ins around the country, and incentives to young people to
get vaccinated. We also continue to redouble our efforts to keep
the vaccine evergreen for those who have not yet had their first
dose.
(Richmond Park) (LD)
Last week, I spoke to a constituent who is a widow with four
children and has been working for the NHS on the frontline
throughout the pandemic. One of her children has a range of very
complex needs that can only be met by full-time residential care,
and there is only one setting in the entire country that can meet
his particular needs. She has been told that it cannot take him
because of a shortage of care staff, and that the particular
difficulty in recruiting at the moment is the requirement for
care staff to have had two jabs. As the right hon. Member for
Forest of Dean (Mr Harper), who is no longer in his place,
highlighted, the vaccine does not prevent infection or the spread
of covid. So why, given the crisis in recruitment of care staff,
do we still have this requirement for two jabs when it is not
effective and is depriving vulnerable people of the care they
need?
If the hon. Lady will forgive me, I wish to reiterate that what
she said is inaccurate in the sense of the vaccines not
preventing infection. Sixty per cent. of people who are
double-vaccinated will not be infected and therefore cannot
spread the virus, but 40% can. This is an important measure. We
have a duty of care to those most vulnerable in care homes in
ensuring that the staff are double-jabbed, and they have until 11
November to do that.
(East Devon) (Con)
Make no mistake: vaccine passports will create a two-tier society
with the hospitality industry having to police an unethical
policy that will hammer its recovery. Given the Government’s own
words that we need to live with this virus, will my hon. Friend
confirm how long vaccine passports will be in place—if passed by
this House?
We will set out in detail in due course exactly how the vaccine
pass will work for domestic use: for example, in nightclubs.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for all the hard work he does and for
answering these very difficult questions. It would seem that each
region of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland has differing versions of the system in relation to
offering vaccine passports, and that confuses people whenever
they read or hear it in the national news. What discussions have
taken place with regional Administrations on this issue? Are
there any plans to standardise each region to have a
one-size-fits-all UK strategy that people can understand and
follow?
I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s excellent question. I am
very proud, as are the Ministers from the devolved
Administrations, of the work we have done collectively on the
vaccination programme, which we will continue to do for the
booster programme. As he heard earlier, this is a devolved matter
but we try to co-ordinate wherever possible and do the right
thing together.
(Redcar) (Con)
I congratulate the Minister and all those involved in the
vaccination roll-out on four-fifths of over-16-year-olds now
being double-vaccinated. This Government have worked night and
day to ensure that we have the testing capacity to test over 1
million people a day, and many millions more with lateral flow
tests as well. Surely a nightclub full of people who have tested
negative is safer than a nightclub of people who are
double-vaccinated.
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s championing of the vaccination
programme. He raises an important point. One of the issues around
lateral flow tests is the risk of people fraudulently inputting
their test result, but also those are for a single excursion
whereas being double-vaccinated means that people can go and
enjoy nightclubs as many times as they like.
(Beaconsfield) (Con)
May I, on bended knee, implore my hon. Friend to summon all his
courage and say no to vaccine passports to protect our civil
liberties? He has been so courageous in the vaccine roll-out, so
will he please protect our civil liberties and say no to vaccine
passports?
I hope that when my hon. Friend pauses and reflects on what we
will be bringing forward, she will see that it is that it is much
better for the nightclub industry to be able to open sustainably
while we get through the next few months. The winter months are
going to be tough and challenging not just for covid but also for
flu. It is a far better option to listen to the clinical advice
of the CMOs and implement something that is difficult for me to
do, and goes against everything I believe in, but nevertheless is
the right thing to do.
(Buckingham) (Con)
We have a whole summer’s worth of data from the events research
programme that shows how organisers of events such as the British
grand prix at Silverstone in my constituency had to meet extreme
costs to put in the planning and the checking of vaccine
passports at the gate. Before this policy is put to a vote in
this House, will my hon. Friend commit to publishing the data on
the cost to business of vaccine passport checks through the
events research programme, so that we can be fully apprised of
the cost of this policy?
My hon. Friend’s question is important and is one that we will be
looking at. Suffice to say, as I mentioned earlier, the events
research programme certainly gave us the confidence that people
can deal with this measure relatively easily. In the way that a
nightclub bouncer can check ID, they can check covid vaccination
status.
(Scunthorpe) (Con)
Like many across the House, I am instinctively wary of this idea.
Will my hon. Friend give me a clear answer to a specific
question: will right hon. and hon. Members receive a vote? For
the avoidance of doubt, I am talking about a vote and not
scrutiny of the policy.
I have said that there will be parliamentary scrutiny around
this, and we will be coming back and setting out in detail what
that looks like.
(Bury
South) (Con)
I am flabbergasted, depressed and annoyed that we are even
discussing this matter. It is absolutely wrong on a fundamental
level. Putting to one side the practical implications of how it
will be policed, more important are the general data protection
regulation implications of bouncers having medical data in their
hands. What are we doing in regard to the data? Nightclubs have
been open for over two months. Is there any data to support this
policy, because I do not think there is?
The very strong advice from the chief medical officers—we have
heard from our colleagues in Scotland, too—is that this will be
an important mitigating measure. It is something we do not do
lightly. I completely understand my hon. Friend’s sentiment and
emotion on this. In terms of the data presented, it will be
limited simply to the vaccine status and the name of the
individual. It can be on a smartphone, but if someone does not
have one, it will be physical or by email.
