Quote Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone View Post
Fair point. I suppose the perspective is that if it needs to be disclosed when you apply for life insurance, then its risky. if we adopt the "pay to play" approach to health funding, then arguably the one size fits all free health care based of an income driven NI charge is all wrong, actuarially. But the NHS is funded based on an income driven contribution, rather than a proper risk assessment funding model, which is arguably logically more acceptable.

The principle of the NHS is that healthcare should be free to all regardless of such personal bodily abuses, and funding is based on ability to pay rather than risk presented to the system. So non vaxers, refuse vaxers are just as entitled as anyone else to treatment, as the system is currently set up.

There will always be abusers of this system, and covax doesnt really change the model, just adds a new risk dynamic. As someone who has waited in an A&E department with a child with an unfeasibly high temperature, whilst two blokes were treated for injuries in a drunken fight outside a pub knows only too well - life isnt fair.

The idea of a vaccination certificate to enter public events, bars, restaurants etc is appealing and would certainly persuade people to take the vaccine - subject of course to the ever impossible task of policing. if we had a national ID card, it could simply be added to the data on the magnetic stripe, but of course we dont believe in such think as they infringe civil liberties. Hmmmm. perhaps the EU have got that bit right!
Totally identify with your A&E scenario, GP. I’ve been in that situation with an elderly relative...queuing for potentially crucial treatment while some little scrote abused the nurse who’d just bandaged him up.

As for National ID cards...I’ve never really understood the objections. Reckon the majority of people already routinely carry at least five forms of identification with them most of the time. Whether it should be compulsory to carry them at all times is much more debatable.