Travel permits an assault on fundamental freedoms

Take the latest announcement about ‘travel permits’ – this is where a travel ban is being enacted in regulations in the form of a requirement for an essential travel permit, and that returning home for Guernsey residents – even for those holding a Guernsey passport – will only constitute an essential reason for travel if they left on or before 12 Jan. This is tantamount to holding everyone captive in this island. It is an egregious assault on fundamental freedoms, and I believe that it would be unlikely to stand up in any court of law. We already had one of the most severe and intrusive quarantine regimes seen anywhere in the world, including the extension to 21 days quarantine for those who refuse to be tested on day 13, so why this next step into the heart of darkness? When the island is already hermetically sealed and almost totally suffocated, how much tighter can the ligature be?

The local media appears to toe the CCA ‘party line’. This has fomented an atmosphere where anyone questioning the CCA orthodoxy is seen as a heretic, and is vilified by the illiberal hordes that now run amok on social media. We are told by the chief minister that no one is ‘welcome’ to travel here, and I fear that this animus towards outsiders simply feeds into a xenophobia that is now bubbling away just below the surface.

If journalists have the temerity to ask the CCA even a gentle question during a briefing they risk being scolded. Instead of open communication as the default setting, we hear this from the Chief Minister: ‘I will not be pressured by people critiquing the States of Guernsey communication strategy’ because ‘it could stir unease and misinformation’. In fact it is this opaqueness and defensiveness that characterises how the CCA functions, and it is this which stirs the ‘unease’ he alludes to. In other democratic jurisdictions ministers and their advisers are routinely challenged, as they should be, but not in Guernsey. Where transparency is expected and respected in those other places, in Guernsey it is all inscrutable; we are fed on the morsels of information that the CCA decides we should have. We are not trusted with the data that informs the decisions that are being made, some of which cause severe upset and emotional and mental turmoil for so many people. Why aren’t the minutes of the CCA meetings made available for public scrutiny as they are in other places? Unfortunately, it is rule by diktat in a way that seems to bypass the normal democratic process, and the person who exercises what appears to be near omnipotent powers is an unelected civil servant.

None of this is healthy in any democracy.

The UK MHRA approved the AstraZeneca vaccine on 30 December. Why did it take another 10 days for the authorities here to confirm their approval? There are infinitely more expert scientists and medics on the MHRA than we have on this little island.

Why didn’t the CCA order a sufficient quantity of vaccine doses months ago directly from the vaccine companies, as an independent jurisdiction can do, and as the UK did? The CCA should have brought in private sector expertise in procurement and logistics to get the job done and the vaccine we need on the island. Had the CCA done this, and with Beau Sejour operational seven days a week and vaccinating 3,000 people a day – which is what we are told it can process – then from that one site the entire population could have been offered the first protective jab within three weeks. Instead of that we are being told that ‘40,000 doses of vaccines are due to arrive over here over the next few months’. This is a real failure by the CCA to act decisively and effectively. If you doubt what can be achieved with a vaccine roll out by a well organised small country and an efficient government, just look at Israel.

To probe and challenge and hold government to account are the hallmarks of a functioning democracy – but this is now almost absent from discourse in Guernsey.

This island must be opened up as soon as those who are at risk of being hospitalised or dying from the virus are vaccinated (and the ONS data is very clear as to those who are at risk if they catch the virus), and we must know the date when this is expected to happen. Thus far, Dr Nicola Brink has not answered that fundamentally important question; when asked the question recently she just smiled, and replied rather cryptically that it is ‘in my diary’. That is not good enough at all. We would like to have the date in our diaries as well.

NAME AND ADDRESS WITHHELD