I deliberated for a long time whether to write a piece on the controversial topic of vaccine passports. As it’s becoming a real possibility for us returning to stadiums I felt it was both relevant and important to cover.
I appreciate it’s divisive and likely to evoke strong views and opinions. We may fundamentally disagree on it but I wanted my writing to be meaningful and balanced whichever side of the argument you come down on. This piece aims to give a summary on what the proposals are, responses to it so far and some thoughts and considerations around passports being used in football.
Test Launch
The FA Cup semi-final and final have been earmarked as test events for the proposed ‘COVID-status certification’ system (vaccine passports to you and me). This system would show if a person has had a vaccine, a recent negative test or natural immunity from a positive test taken within the last six months.
The Prime Minister insisted “It is going to be responsible for any government to look at the possibility of making sure that we can continue to open up all sectors of the economy in a safe way down the rest of this year… But I have absolutely no doubt that we will continue with the road map that we set out in a safe and secure way, but nobody should think that there’s any need for certificates of any kind either on April 12 or May 17.”. As the review into vaccine passports report is due in June it is heavily rumoured that they will be on course to be introduced from 21 June to coincide with the end of lockdown.
As the Championship season ends on the 8 May we will not experience any changes first-hand until next season. This summers Euros are still up in air. Host countries are in the process of reporting back to UEFA the capacity % and numbers of fans they will be able to permit to attend games.
Whilst we can’t be sure what will happen judging by the recent intense media coverage (born from Government leaks, which have typified this pandemic) — I’d guess it will not be far from the truth.
The FA, EFL and PL have recently joined the UK’s leading sports bodies in backing the use of such passports, the letter stating: “All of our sports can see the benefit that a Covid certification process offers in getting more fans safely back to their sport as quickly as possible… The final approach must not be discriminatory, should protect privacy, and have a clear exit strategy.” I got the impression reading the letter that the agreement to passports is so the return of fans can be accelerated in greater numbers with less social distancing. It is unsurprising as many clubs will be in dire financial positions as one of their main income streams in ticket sales has been completely obliterated for over a year. Is it the right move?
What you said
I put out a poll on Twitter as I was curious to know what people thought to using a vaccine passport to return to the stands.
In the question ‘Would you be ok with having to use a vaccine passport to go back to football?’ Out of the 163 responders 62% answered ‘Yes’, 30.7% answered ‘No’ and 7.4% were ‘Unsure’. Whilst it wasn’t a big survey I felt it was quite striking.
It did bring up some arguments and queries too including: Would children be exempt? Isn’t it just like showing your ID at the bar when you were younger? What is the difference between this and your drivers license, national insurance number or medical number? Doesn’t it infringe on our human rights?
In the next part I wanted to address some of those points and additional things to consider.
Thoughts and considerations
Carl Ikeme, former Wolves goalkeeper, has become one of the first in football to speak out against the use of vaccine passports in the game. Speaking to i newspaper he said: “We know black and ethnic minorities are more hesitant to have vaccines… It’s going to create more divisiveness in our society than there is already. Having these Covid passes is either going to force people to have a jab they don’t want or is going to force people not to take part in society the way we’re all used to. And everyone who lives in this country has a fundamental right to live by their own beliefs.” I think his words are powerful.
The disparities of vaccine uptake rates between ethic groups in the U.K. are large. Analysis of NHS England’s COVID-19 vaccination figures shows that 90.6% of all recipients of COVID-19 vaccines so far (Feb 21) have been white. Comparing uptake with other ethnicities shows that people of mixed ethnicity, Asian and black are, respectively, approximately only 33, 47 and 64% as likely to receive the vaccine as white people. The most common reasons (BMJ) given for this hesitancy is concerns about side effects and long term effects plus a lack of trust in vaccines. Adding to historical mistrust of government and public health bodies that runs deep in some ethnic minority groups. The government are rolling out campaigns and targeted messaging to encourage BAME groups to come forward for the vaccine when called — whether it has the desired result remains to be seen. If the gap in uptake remains a passport has a real potential to be discriminatory.
Football unites us. People from all walks of lives come together on matchdays to watch the beautiful game. As desperate as I am to get back I think it would be difficult to enjoy a match knowing others are being excluded. The risk of causing social division with a ‘two-tier Britain’ is concerning.
Meanwhile those in favour of vaccine passports cite their use being key to opening up the economy while reducing the risk of transmission. Are they really key to our route to normality though? A group of public health experts found that “there may be a comparatively narrow window where there is scientific confidence about the impact of vaccines on transmission and enough of a vaccinated population that it is worth segregating rights and freedoms. Once there is population-level herd immunity it will not make sense to differentiate, and passports would be unnecessary.”. Recently released UCL modelling has said that Britain will achieve herd immunity this Monday (12th April) as the number of people with protection either through vaccination or previous infection will hit 73.4%. This is a major milestone in the pandemic. Should we be pushed into a having a vaccine passport without first doing a robust risk-benefit analysis? Football authorities and clubs will be desperate to get the return of fans sped up but is it a needless step in the roadmap back to the terraces?
Moving onto the comparative questions like “What’s the difference between this and your drivers license/national insurance/medical number?” or that to travel to certain parts of Africa you need a yellow fever passport commonly come up. I think this is a false equivalence and these things are quite different. The difference being with a drivers license is you don’t need to drive a car to get around. You have alternatives like buses, trains and taxis etc. When you monopolise a vaccine passport to enter a venue everyone has to comply or risk being excluded from said activity. This, in turn, creates coercion as people may feel pressured to take a vaccine/test they would not otherwise have done so in order to enter. It troubles me seeing people suggest that it’s okay and that they’d rather not mix with the ‘anti-vaxxers’ or ‘conspiracy theorists’. There are valid reasons someone may not choose to get a vaccine including those who can’t due to medical reasons. Everyone has the freedom to make their own informed decision and we, as a collective, cannot let any football fan be ostracised. It’s inhuman.
Another of the issues that was raised: Does the use of a vaccine passport infringe on our human rights? Adam Wagner a Human Rights Barrister wrote about this and in his assessment labelled it a ‘tricky moral position’ after looking at arguments both for and against the potential threat to our human rights. He highlighted the proposed plans: “Certification will be used as a passport to certain social activities — though expressly not to “essential public services”, public transport and “essential shops”… the more controversial use is for entry to… mass sporting events”. The strongest case given for their use is the potential way to break the cycle of lockdowns which have severely impacted all of our lives. Though he admits if you do not believe lockdowns are justified or proportional you may not agree with this reasoning.
There is increasing evidence that vaccines help reduce transmission and that more than 9,000 likely fatalities were prevented in those over 80 which is, of course, welcome news. The UKs vaccine programme roll-out has been very successful and now the majority of the most vulnerable groups have been offered the jab — do we need to vaccinate everybody before we’re all safe to enjoy a match? We have to acknowledge the risk of becoming severely ill and dying from covid is much lower for young people with no underlying health issues. In addition to this the risk of catching covid outside is extraordinarily low. For example, Professor Mark Woolhouse, a leading government adviser said: “over the summer we were treated to all this on the television, news, pictures of crowded beaches and there was an outcry over this. There were no outbreaks linked to crowded beaches. There has never been a COVID-19 outbreak linked to a beach ever anywhere in the world to the best of my knowledge.” He added: “We do have to understand where the risks are or aren’t.” It’s a significant point. On the talks of vaccine passports, Robert Dingwall, a professor of sociology, said: “I can’t myself see the point. The whole idea of a vaccine is that it protects you. It doesn’t tell you anything significant about the risk that you’re presenting to another person.”
The last full capacity crowd attending a football match was 395 days ago. (Liverpool vs. Atlético Madrid). Far too long. Vaccine passports do seem to be being sold to us as a fast-track ticket for clubs to fill grounds again. It’s easy to see why it might be desirable rather than work with tiny % caps on crowd numbers and an abundance of rules which would make the experience much less enjoyable or familiar to pre-pandemic.
To finish on a piece published by Liberty, one of the UKs largest civil liberties organisations, who said the following:
“What’s telling is that in all conversations about immunity passports, little attention is paid to privacy protection or data access. In looking for a way out of lockdown, people are not giving serious consideration to how immunity passports would jeopardise our freedom in the long-term… To get through coronavirus, we need to pull together and demand a response that protects us all.”
Wrap Up
I hope this provided a good overall view on vaccine passports and if they should play a role in our return to stadiums. I think there are two sides to this: viewing it as a reasonable concept given the exceptional circumstances or something with a potential to cause divisions and the creation of a two tier society.
Whilst I can understand why the footballing bodies have put their support behind passports I can’t help but feel it may be misplaced as rather than looking at the evidence their focus is solely on getting fans back asap. There is quite a contrast in response for example from the hospitality sector who suggested these plans would be a nightmare. I would say the case against the implementation of domestic vaccine passports is strong. Then given the nature of the governments response to the pandemic even if they were supposedly just a ‘short term’ measure they may be mandatory for significantly longer than necessary.
The plans I’m sure will become clearer in the coming weeks and months. All things considered my main concern is not wanting this to sew divisions between fans. Mainly as football is more than a game, it brings us together.
