ROTHENBURGER: An ‘unvaxxed tax’ would edge us close to mandatory vaccination

Singapore has gone even further, saying the unvaccinated must pay for their hospital care. That took effect Jan. 1.

Quebec Premier Francois Legault has so far said only that the “contribution” in his province will be “significant.” It’s pretty safe to assume anyone with valid medical reasons for remaining unvaxxed will get a pass but age thresholds, methodology for levying the fines and so on remain questions to be answered.

Legault’s rationale — as is the case in other countries — is that the tax/fine/contribution is needed to help fund a healthcare system that is increasingly stressed by COVID due, in large part, to the unvaccinated. Those who have been vaccinated shouldn’t have to pay those costs, he reasons.

Apparently, there are legal arguments not to paint the new penalties as a way of increasing vaccinations but his announcement is already seeing results, with a spike in the numbers of those going in for their first shots.

The concept is troublesome. It’s the closest measure yet to mandatory vaccination, something that doesn’t fit either with our humanity or with the principle of the right to universal healthcare.

A lot of false comparisons are being made on both sides of the argument.

“We fine people for going through red lights, don’t we?”

Yes, we do, but that’s for doing something, not for not doing something, and going through red lights doesn’t involve having something stuck in your arm.

“We don’t fine people or take away their medical coverage for smoking, do we?”

No, we don’t, but smoking is voluntary bodily pollution, and — second-hand smoke aside — we don’t endanger the health and lives of the community every time we light up.

Even if mandatory vaccinations were declared, it’s more likely penalties would involve fines rather than holding people down while the jab was administered, or hauling them off to jail, so the tax isn’t much different.

It’s a dangerous step beyond restrictions on large gatherings, the closing of bars and gyms, vaccine passports and masking. No doubt, the conspiracy theorists will regard the no-vaxxed tax as new proof that Big Government wants to control us for unspecified reasons.

This time, though, they might have a Charter case. Certainly, legal challenges can be expected.

It does raise new questions about equality. If the fine is substantial, the unvaccinated rich would have a distinct advantage over the unvaccinated poor. And restricting it to an older demographic would, in effect, discriminate against seniors.

It remains to be seen whether the tax option will be taken up by other provinces or even if it will stand up in Quebec. Dr. Bonnie Henry said this week it’s not a choice B.C. will take but, given the number of times she’s flip flopped, we can’t exactly take that one to the bank.

This is the biggest stick yet in the fight against COVID. There are other tactics available — incentives such as cash payments, lottery tickets, debit cards, prizes, for example. All have or are currently being tried in various jurisdictions, and they appear to be working.

It’s a sad commentary on the human condition that appeals must be made to our greed in order to get us onboard with saving our own lives, but it’s better than the tax approach.

So, masks, yes. Vaccine passports, yes. Restrictions on gatherings, yes. The unvaxxed tax, no.

Mel Rothenburger is a former mayor of Kamloops and a retired newspaper editor. He is a regular contributor to CFJC Today, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a director on the Thompson-Nicola Regional District board. He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.

——

Editor’s Note: This opinion piece reflects the views of its author, and does not necessarily represent the views of CFJC Today or Pattison Media.

by Mel Rothenburger

ROTHENBURGER: An ‘unvaxxed tax’ would edge us close to mandatory vaccination

Our Community