I HAD my first Covid vaccination a couple of weeks ago. I’m counting down the days until I can be pretty sure I’ve built up enough antibodies to be relatively protected, but I don’t think I’ll feel completely safe until I’ve had the second dose.
But what then? Will I be able to go on that holiday to Spain we postponed from last summer?
This was written before the Prime Minister revealed his routemap out of lockdown but I’m guessing even after the great revelation, we won’t be much wiser. After all, the new three-word slogan is ‘data not dates’. I’m all in favour of staying in lockdown until it’s safe to release the restrictions but just for once, I’m with Boris Johnson if he is true to his word and is guided by the science this time.
But what of the idea of people who have had both jabs being given a ‘vaccine passport’ that will allow them to do things that the unvaccinated can’t?
The idea sounds appealing on the face of it, but I can’t help but feel they will be divisive and discriminatory.
Prof Melinda Mills, lead author of a Royal Society report on vaccination passports makes some valid points. She said: "What would it be used for – getting a job or attending a football match or buying milk? What if we start barring people from essential goods and services?
"There is a risk of unjustly discriminating in hiring, attending events, insurance, housing applications, you can think of many examples.”
The passport scheme on the face of it sounds like a good idea, but maybe on reflection it’s not so good – unless it lets me get away for two weeks in the sun.
Apropos of nothing, the announcement that a new café in Sankey Street is to be named after the famous (or is that infamous) Carlton Club brought the memories flooding back – some good and some not quite so good.
I was heavily into Northern Soul in my teenage years and can vividly recall desperately trying to remember a birth date that would have made me 18 and old enough to get in when I was probably about 16.
I’m pretty sure the bouncers didn’t believe a word of it but I somehow managed to convince them I was old enough and once you got your membership card, no one questioned you.
I had some great nights there, including being within touching distance of soul legends Wilson Pickett and Ben E King.
(I didn’t see Edwin Starr perform at the Carlton but I did go to see him in the NCO’s mess at RAF Burtonwood, complete with a room full of US servicemen and women. What a night that was when I was invited back stage to meet the great man.)
Anyway, it wasn’t always great at the Carlton and I have an abiding memory of being smacked in the mouth by a couple of Scousers in the toilets in a case of mistaken identity after they confused me with someone else.
Happy(ish) days.
On another topic, I feel the need to clear up a little confusion from my column last week when I made a comment about the council’s funding model that currently sees it with asset-backed debt to the tune of £1.3 billion which is forecast to reach close to £2.3 billion in 2023.
In my last column, I described it as a legitimate way to conduct business. Just to clear up any misunderstanding, this is a legitimate way to conduct ‘commercial’ business but maybe not so much for local authorities.
As I’ve said previously, the government has clamped down on councils (including Warrington) borrowing cheaply from the Public Works Loan Board if the loan is simply to generate yield. This has been one of the council’s main sources of finance but that tap has been turned off.
And I am indebted to regular contributor Chris Haggett who tells me: “CIPFA's (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) Prudential Code specifically precludes borrowing for financial yield.
“Generally, local authorities need only ‘have regard to’ the Code, but adherence to it is a mandatory requirement for CIPFA members.”
Mr Haggett points out that Lynton Green (WBC’s deputy chief executive, director of corporate services and a CIPFA member) will be well aware of this, and suggest this explains his – and Cllr Cathy Mitchell's – recent statements that the council’s borrowings are not just for commercial gain any longer, but are also to meet local needs.
Mr Haggett added: “I must say this does seem to stretch credibility with investments like the £137 million in a Manchester office development.”
And that’s a good point well made.
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