Socialists want a protected country

The government has now made disease prevention in Iceland a highly political issue after having largely acted in line with health authorities since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic. There has largely been agreement in society regarding this policy, primarily because health authorities have almost exclusively proposed to the government what the majority of the public has been willing to support and comply with.

A month ago, health authorities requested authorization to strengthen quarantine at the borders. This was in line with the public's will, which has become weary of significant restrictions on daily life. The experience of other nations has shown that strict measures at borders can ensure a virus-free society and thereby few, if any, restrictions on daily life.

Where it has been most successful, the damage from the virus has not only been less, public life more enjoyable, but the economic contraction has also been smaller. Gathering bans and endless restrictions on daily life drain the economy, destroy jobs, and cause unnecessary economic hardship for individuals and businesses.

The government failed to comply with the request of health authorities for tools to tighten quarantine at borders. The matter was ruined in the handling by Alþingi, which passed laws specifically prohibiting people from being ordered into quarantine facilities. The Ministry of Health then crowned the shame by issuing a regulation contrary to the laws, a regulation which was understandably ruled illegal in district court.

Today, the government is attempting to pass through Alþingi a new bill that goes much less far than the previous bill. It has been further diluted in a compromise with the owners of the largest tourism companies on the one hand, and on the other hand, the neoliberals in Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn, who place the right of individuals to be in home quarantine above the societal benefit of a virus-free society.

It is clear that the risk of infection, illness, and even death is greater if border disease prevention measures are weaker. It is also clear that economic contraction will be less if it is possible to lift all domestic restrictions under the protection of strict border disease prevention measures.

Therefore, there are no economic arguments for the demands of the owners of the largest tourism companies. Their demand is based on the idea that they themselves might profit if more tourists come here, even though the entire society will lose much more money at the same time. And there are no arguments for the outcries of the neoliberal faction in Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn about human rights. It can be read in the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights that the state is permitted to restrict the rights of individuals in the face of an acute threat and significant interests of the whole. Human rights are intended to build societies, not break them down.

In light of this, and since the government has decided to deviate from its path and make disease prevention a political issue in Icelandic society; the executive committee of Sósíalistaflokkur Íslands declares that it supports a protected country, that disease prevention measures be strengthened at the borders in the hope that daily life within them can become as normal as possible. Socialists completely reject the claims of the neoliberals that border quarantine is a human rights violation. And socialists completely reject that the interests of shareholders in the very largest tourism companies should be considered more important than the well-being of the entire public from a normal life.

Socialists support a protected country.