The use of Covid passports and certificates is a complicated issue for the government

The idea behind the stern-sounding vaccination and testing certificates is that they would allow people to demonstrate their Covid-free status. But the introduction of these documents – the subject of a government review – is a complicated issue. There are advantages, but such measures also involve real ethical questions.

People have a right to be foolish, but they do not have the right to put the lives of others in jeopardy. As England’s chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, has indignantly pointed out, surgeons are not allowed to operate on patients without a vaccination for hepatitis, something that few would argue with.

For the leisure trade, from bistros to gyms to Wembley Stadium, it seems reasonable to ask visitors if they pose a risk to others. Much the same goes for public transport, and for international travel a Covid vaccination certificate may turn out to be a routine requirement.

There are also economic considerations. The more confident people feel about returning to the restaurant or theatre, the sooner the fortunes of these establishments will be restored, the sooner staff can get back to work, and the sooner these businesses can come off the expensive life-support schemes provided by the state. And, of course, a restored economy means more confidence, better mental health for all and the tax revenues needed to fund public services returning to normal. Each of those is also an ethical consideration that has to be weighed in the balance.

It is even more of a challenge to make a vaccination a condition of employment, either for existing workers or new recruits. A negative test is an alternative, but less satisfactory because it is more likely to be out of date or potentially inaccurate. “A jab for a job” is undeniably discriminatory and Boris Johnson appears aware of the complications, having said on Tuesday: “We can’t be discriminatory against people who, for whatever reason, can’t have a vaccine. There might be medical reasons why people can’t have a vaccine, some people may genuinely refuse to have one – now, I think that’s a mistake.”

Beyond international travel, care and clinical settings would seem the most obvious places where a Covid-19 vaccination is a fair ask of somebody, perhaps with some flexibility for genuine objection. But ethical, privacy and equalities concerns will have to be investigated. The creation of a two-tier society – where some people can access support and freedoms, while others are shut out – is a major concern.

The practical realities of any environment or business or indeed individual being able to declare themselves Covid-free may in the end render the government’s review otiose. Policing such claims would be difficult, if not impossible, and the potential for fraud is obvious. Liability for failing to maintain Covid-free status is difficult to prove.

With luck, Covid-19 will be a risk that the country learns to manage without resorting to coercive pressure on workers or consumers, but that does depend on the extent to which mass vaccination is a success. The signs, thankfully, are encouraging.