Is ‘2G’ necessary? It seems to be about little else: the question of whether unvaccinated people should be denied access to cafes and other areas where a QR code is required, with care becoming overloaded. In the current 3G regime – there is now also a pandemic of terrible abbreviations – someone can also gain access after a negative test certificate. This would no longer be possible with 2G (‘access only with vaccination or proof of recovery’). In the less well-vaccinated Austria they have already come this far. In Germany too. Even the curfew, the most severe measure in the Netherlands to date, was generic: applicable to everyone. In 2G, one group would be treated significantly differently from the rest. This can be defended virologically: unvaccinated people are more contagious, and therefore more vulnerable themselves. Socially this is a complicated issue. This step would limit the freedom of choice of unvaccinated people, which tends to be compulsory vaccination.
Also read: 2G: going a stricter corona pass do you help?
On Tuesday the House of Representatives will debate the new and upcoming corona measures and it is hoped that this can be done in a dignified way, without crazy historical comparisons or chatter about the emergence of a dictatorship in the Netherlands. That is not the case, and it is up to the President of the House to watch over the much-praised Dutch sobriety.
Tuesday’s fundamental question: has the cabinet done enough to justify a further escalation of measures? The answer is: no. Permanently excluding measures is difficult and never wise. Perhaps at some point 2G will be unavoidable, as a last resort in an exceptional situation. At this stage of the crisis, however, it is difficult to defend. This government has built up too little credit for such a serious decision. The questions pile up. Have the means to change the mind of the unvaccinated have been exhausted? Why does the cabinet intervene so slowly, even if the infections are casting their shadow far ahead? Why is there easing so quickly, against common sense? Why are fundamental political decisions passed on to the mayor or local bouncer? Why has it always been pretended that vaccination will solve everything, while now, despite a very high vaccination rate by European standards, hard action has to be taken again?
The Cabinet remains stubbornly optimistic when it comes to corona
That there are so many questions should give the government something to think about. Yes, 2G can work, but it can also affect trust. The doubters will doubt more. Vaccinated people will get even angrier about that. Others, on the other hand, will feel growing discomfort about the growing dichotomy and will lose the confidence in the cabinet that has been given so far. In a crisis that will last for a while, that is not desirable. The government must now bring people closer together and not drive them further apart. In this phase, with 2G, it would opt for the latter: encourage polarization instead of building trust.
Outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte should take an example from Femke Halsema. The Amsterdam mayor called in a video message to tolerance. “Especially for dissenters. For the elderly who are afraid of the virus, young people who want to live uninhibitedly, for the vaccinated and people who make use of their inalienable right to unfortunately make a different choice.” In less than two and a half minutes, Halsema provided Rutte with a recipe with which he could distinguish himself as a connecting leader. It’s not too late.
A version of this article also appeared in NRC in the morning of November 16, 2021
#cabinet #credit