Covid Status Certification checks - so called ‘Covid passports’ - have been in force for over a week now. However, they are currently subject to a so-called ‘grace period’ with enforcement measures not taking effect until next week. The concern our members have about this policy was reflected in a recent Snap Poll that we conducted. Despite polling on the assumption that the policy was going to be enacted, almost 30% of respondents took the opportunity of a ‘free text section’ to express the view that the policy was a mistake and should not have been implemented. There was a strong sense from members that there was no clear purpose to the policy, and that it was a disproportionate response to the challenges society is facing. Over 85% of those polled stated that the policy should either not proceed at all or, if it were to go ahead, that it should apply to both the public sector and private sector alike. Of those businesses that are required to implement the policy, 60% said that it will negatively impact their operating costs. More than two thirds of all respondents, irrespective of whether the policy impacts them directly or not, said that businesses that are compelled to enforce certification checks should receive support in order to do so.
After intense lobbying by FSB, on the Friday night before the policy was due to come into effect, sudden last-minute changes were made. It was announced that unlicensed hospitality, such as cafes and coffee shops, would initially not be included within the scope of the policy. While this respite brought some relief to the businesses in this sector, the fact of making the exemption announcement less than 72 hours before the policy was due to be put in place was an exemplar in how not to do government. The policy was also altered so that using a paper 'vaccine card', in tandem with photographic ID, would continue to be deemed sufficient to demonstrate customer Covid status.
While we fully support the drive to make premises safer, we continue to have concerns about the underlying rationale of Covid Status Certification and its asymmetric application, with the burden falling entirely on the private sector. The risk is that it creates a ‘chill factor’ and disincentivises occasional users of hospitality from venturing out in the golden pre-Christmas period. For many micro-businesses the compliance costs associated with implementing this policy also add to overheads at a time of rising pressures elsewhere. Therefore, with a double whammy of reduced customers and increased costs, profitability is significantly impacted. While we continue to have concerns about the fundamentals of the policy, we also recognise that it is now in law and likely to persist in some form. Consequently, our intention must turn to shaping it in such a way that it causes the least damage to our members.
There are three common sense steps which the Executive could take which would greatly improve the substance of the policy. Firstly, permanently allow the existing vaccine cards, in tandem with photographic ID, to be an acceptable means of demonstrating Covid status. This would much improve accessibility of the scheme, particularly for older people, and for others who do not possess a smartphone - for whom going through the processes of the Covid Cert App is simply not feasible. Secondly, do not introduce this policy to unlicensed hospitality until at least the New Year. The Executive has already recognised there are particular challenges for this sector, therefore rushing in implementation of Covid Status Checks in these environments in the next few weeks would be deeply unwise. Thirdly, put in place a clear ‘sunset clause’ by which point regulations implementing Covid Status Certification would cease to apply, unless actively extended by the Executive. This would prevent the policy continuing in perpetuity, by default, if there were a lack of agreement to form an Executive after the election in Spring, or if the devolved institutions were to cease to function.
Adopting these measures would show that the Executive is listening to the concerns of businesses and is adapting policy accordingly. Ploughing ahead with a maximalist approach, would effectively amount to restriction without compensation, which would not reflect an Executive that understands, values or cares about the business community.