Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Vaccine Passports

15 March 2021 · 14 other contributors · 12,973 words

Opened by Mike Hill Lab Hartlepool

Responding minister: Penny Mordaunt

NHS

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Mike Hill raised concerns about vaccine passports in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • Mr David Nolan has gathered 295,842 signatures for an e-petition raising concerns about vaccine passports.
  • There is fear that younger or healthier individuals may be excluded from activities due to lack of vaccination.
  • Concerns exist about the digital divide, potentially excluding elderly or impoverished individuals from vaccine passport systems.

Key requests to Government

I urge the Minister to clarify any concrete plans regarding vaccine passports and how they could be implemented domestically. It is crucial that the Government considers potential drawbacks and ensures fairness for everyone, especially vulnerable groups and those further down the vaccination priority list.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Mike Hill Lab Hartlepool

The petitioner Mr David Nolan has gathered 295,842 signatures for the e-petition. The concerns raised are not limited to those who refuse vaccination but extend to the implementation of vaccine passports and their potential technology issues for everyone in society. There is a fear that younger people or those with no pre-existing health conditions may be excluded from certain activities due to age, which can cause significant social and economic disparity. Additionally, there are concerns about how a vaccine passport system would manage the digital divide, potentially excluding elderly individuals or those living in poverty who lack access to smartphones.

Other contributors (14)
  • Alistair Carmichael Lib Dem Orkney and Shetland

    Mr. Carmichael opposes the idea of a vaccine passport, suggesting it would be counterproductive after a year of restrictions. He draws parallels to the Identity Cards Act 2006, warning that once freedoms are given up, they rarely return. Mr. Carmichael argues against using passports for non-travel purposes and warns about long-term implications on citizen-state relationships.

  • Ben Bradley Con Arundel and South Downs

    He supports the idea of vaccine passports for international travel but opposes domestic mandates, advocating for personal choice over medical procedures. He warns against coercive measures like 'no jab, no job' policies which he deems discriminatory and legally questionable.

  • Carla Lockhart DUP Upper Bann

    She questioned the fairness of vaccine passports, noting that they could unfairly restrict those who have not taken the vaccine for personal reasons. She also pointed out the lack of evidence showing the vaccine's effectiveness in reducing transmission and highlighted the challenges of implementing such a scheme across borders with Northern Ireland.

  • Chris Green Con Wyre and Preston North

    Emphasised the importance of respecting individual countries' decisions regarding vaccine passports, highlighting the diminishing threat of the disease while acknowledging concerns over certification. Noted his comfort with paper vaccination certificates but raised significant questions about electronic databases and civil liberties.

  • Fleur Anderson Lab Putney

    Ms Anderson raised concerns about the complexity of vaccine passports, including issues related to technology access and medical consent. She highlighted the importance of addressing practical matters that might discourage vaccination among certain groups, such as social care workers losing a day's pay after getting vaccinated. Ms Anderson also questioned the Government on their progress in reviewing the potential role of covid status certificates in reopening parts of the economy.

  • Greg Smith Con Mid Buckinghamshire

    Mr. Smith is concerned about the introduction of domestic covid certificates, deeming them intrusive and discriminatory. He argues that vaccine passports would have a disproportionate impact on groups with vaccine hesitancy or medical conditions preventing vaccination. Mr. Smith emphasizes that compelling people to take vaccines may not result in higher uptake.

  • Ian Paisley Jnr DUP North Antrim

    Welcomed the debate as an opportunity for the Government to reinforce that they will not introduce vaccine passports, arguing such measures would be unnecessary and could lead to a two-tier society. Highlighted the success of the UK's vaccine roll-out and warned against politicising scientific decisions.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Jim Shannon stated that he had chosen to get vaccinated and encouraged others to do so but emphasized that it must remain a personal choice without government enforcement. He mentioned that more than 24 million people have received their first vaccine dose, with about 1.5 million having a second dose. Eight in ten people would take the vaccine if available, according to recent surveys.

  • John Howell Con Daventry

    The issue needs to be split into two aspects: foreign trips and domestic activities. For foreign travel, proof of vaccination will likely be required by other countries or travel firms. Domestically, ethical questions arise, and the Government should review these issues while also considering the Council of Europe's reviews.

  • John Spellar Lab Ealing North

    The debate should start with principles: informed consent for medical procedures is essential. The House should support progress and science, as vaccines have transformed societies. Practicalities include the production of secure validated certificates for international travel, which would help airline staff and those in the travel industry return to work. Emphasised the importance of the right to work and highlighted the difficulties many citizens face in finding employment or keeping their businesses afloat, suggesting that urgent action is needed.

  • Martyn Day SNP Linlithgow and East Falkirk

    Mr Martyn Day discussed the ethical, legal, and practical implications of vaccine passports in light of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. He mentioned that businesses such as Saga and Qantas are requiring proof of vaccination for their services, but noted concerns about the legality and ethics of these measures, including issues around discrimination and data protection. Mr Day also highlighted the World Health Organisation's recommendation against introducing requirements of proof of vaccination or immunity for international travel at this time due to uncertainties regarding vaccine efficacy in reducing transmission.

  • Munira Wilson Lib Dem Twickenham

    Wilson questioned the fairness of having two tiers of rights based on health status and highlighted that some people cannot be vaccinated due to health reasons. She also raised concerns about vaccine efficacy against new mutations and variants, advocating for robust public health interventions over discriminatory systems.

  • Steven Baker Cons Devizes

    I am concerned that vaccine passports will treat individuals as commodities to be managed by the state and could lead to unnecessary deprivation of liberty due to false positives from lateral flow tests. They would also discriminate against those who have not had either a vaccine or a recent test result, infringe on individual autonomy, and create an overbearing control on society. Asked the Minister if individuals who choose not to get vaccinated would bear their own responsibility, and that others should not be held back due to personal choices.

  • William Wragg Con Hazel Grove

    The Cabinet Office published terms of reference and a consultation on vaccine passports during the debate. William Wragg expressed concern about mandating vaccines for healthcare workers after their difficult year, and opposed the idea of covid vaccine certification for everyday use by citizens to access venues and services.

Government Response

Penny Mordaunt

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. I congratulate all Members who spoke in the debate and who helped to secure it, particularly the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill). The covid status certification review has just commenced with its terms of reference published today on the Government website. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will lead on domestic-facing issues, while a cross-Government group chaired by the Secretary of State for Transport is working on international travel-related issues. The review will consider the effectiveness, ethical, privacy, legal and operational aspects of certification, as well as its implications for those unable or unwilling to be vaccinated, equality implications, and impact on disproportionately affected groups. I reassure hon. Members that returning to normal life means lifting restrictions but also enjoying other things missed over the last 12 months. The review aims to assess whether certification could play a role in opening up the economy and society while considering practicalities and public opinion. It will address issues like trust, evidence-based decisions, international travel, coercion, and civil liberties concerns. The minister thanked all contributors for their input and assured them that the debate would help shape the review.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy