NICOLA Sturgeon expertly picked apart Anas Sarwar’s “opposition for opposition’s sake” over vaccine passports.
The Scottish Labour leader used his spot at FMQs to discuss vaccine certifcation ahead of a debate in Holyrood this afternoon and stated that the party would not support the proposals.
However, the First Minister forensically dismantled Sarwar’s claims that a negative lateral flow test would be more effective than the scheme.
She also criticised the Scottish Labour leader for his stance and said “a bit more genuine grown up politics on this issue would go a long way”.
READ MORE: Scottish independence support ahead and SNP on 51% in latest Opinium poll
If the motion passes in Holyrood, vaccine passports will come into effect on October 1.
But during FMQs today, the First Minister deftly defended the policy under questioning from Sarwar.
The Scottish Labour leader began by citing advice given by Sage on how to reduce transmission of the virus.
Sarwar said: “One, isolate those that are infectious from the rest of the population, vaccine passports won’t do that.
"Two, reduce the likelihood they will enter high risk settings or situations, vaccine passports won’t do that.
"Three, attempt to decreare the transmission risk from an infectious person in any given environment and given the high transmissability of the delta variant, vaccine passports won’t do that.”
The First Minister defended the passport certifcation scheme during FMQs
He then asked the First Minister what evidence led her to “change her mind” and support vaccine passports.
The First Minister quickly responded that she hand’t changed her mind and had said in Parliament on multiple occasions that the Government is “considering the issue”.
She said: “Vaccine certification is not a 100% solution in itself, all of these things Sarwar has run though have to be done but in addition vaccine passports can provide an added layer of protection.”
Sturgeon added that vaccine certification at events would “reduce the risk of transmission” and of serious illness, as well as giving an alternative to further closures of businesses during the winter months.
READ MORE: Scotland in Union's latest independence poll questioned by experts
She also took a dig at Sarwar suggesting that “a bit more genuine grown up politics on this issue would go a long way”.
Sarwar said in response: “I had respect for all of the First Minister’s answer apart from the end part of that. Is she saying that all those businesses worried out there, are being disrespectful?
“Is she saying that the thousands of people that have emailed us are being disrespectful? “These are serious questions which deserve serious answers.”
Sarwar then criticised the document published this morning setting out the vaccine certification plans as containing “no evidence” of how it will make a difference or work in practice.
Sturgeon said: “Firstly I did make a comment about Anas Sarwar’s position, it wasn’t a comment on anybody elses position, because I do think to have said categorically as he did at the weekend that no matter what he was going to vote against something, actually, frankly, is opposition for opposition’s sake and I think that reflects really poorly on him but that is my opinion, people can agree or disagree.”
The First Minister added that most businesses are likely to “on balance” prefer to be able to operate rather than facing a period of closure, which vaccine certification would allow.
Sarwar then argued that as you can still get the virus whilst being vaccinated, a negative test is more important going into a large venue.
He added: “But under these proposals, someone who doesn’t have a vaccine passport and doesn’t have the virus will not be allowed to enter venues, but someone who does have a passport and does have the virus can walk straight in.
“How does that make sense?”
READ MORE: SNP MP asks Boris Johnson why he can't fund care reform with £350m Brexit boost
The First Minister quickly hit back and pulled apart Sarwar’s claims.
She said: “I think most people watching this will probably breathe a sigh of relief Anas Sarwar is not standing here because clever quips might sound good in student union, but when you’re actually trying to deal with global pandemic it is more important that you have the solutions that help to keep people safe.”
Taking his points in turn, on a negative test being more important the First Minister said the issue was that lateral flow tests are self-reporting which means it “doesn’t make sense to put too much reliance on them”.
Sarwar said Scottish Labour would not support the certification proposals
She added that although you can still get the virus whilst vaccinated, vaccination reduces the risk of hospitalisation or serious illness.
She added: “So if you’re saying to somebody, do you want to be in a nightclub where some people are unvaccinated or do you want to be in a nightclub where everyone is vaccinated, in the latter your risk of getting the virus is going to be significantly lower than in the former.
“Is it eradicated? No, but no single measure will eradicate risk so this is about having a basket of measures.
“It’s about testing, it’s about making sure people isolate when they are required to, but it’s also about making sure that we use the vaccine to its fullest effect. Drive up the rates of vaccination and then make sure we’re using the protection of vaccination as effectively possible, so this is part of a solution.”
MSPs will vote on whether or not to introduce vaccine certification in Holyrood this afternoon (September 9).
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel