WE have been advised against non-essential trips to Mexico, but on other health issues the Government goes well beyond issuing advice.
For example, public information on the risks from smoking and excessive drinking are backed up by heavy taxes to discourage these behaviours.
Yet the threats to innocent third parties from passive smoking and drunken driving would be less than that arising from the spread of a pandemic if the disease were to prove at all virulent.
Surely, the privilege of being allowed to put other people’s lives at risk calls at least for the payment of some sort of levy?
We already charge departing fliers Air Passenger Duty.
Wouldn’t it make more sense for this to be payable instead by arriving travellers, and to vary the amount according to their point of origin and the perceived risk?
This could provide a more flexible and responsive means than outright bans for signalling risk and encouraging people to change or delay their travel plans. Any reduction in numbers would make the screening and monitoring process more manageable, and the charge would help to pay for it.
John Riseley, Harrogate, North Yorkshire
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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