If travel is safe for some, it’s safe for all – let us go on holiday

Away from the bustle of pubs and restaurants reopening indoors this week, the Churchill War Rooms in London quietly welcomed back the public too. It was fascinating, as one of the few visitors on day one, to walk the claustrophobic corridors with only ghosts for company and marvel, in our socially distanced times, how close together the desks were in the tiny typing pool – and how many ashtrays there were.

Most eye-catching, though, was the display in the museum detailing all Churchill’s overseas trips during the war. Between 1940 and 1945 he travelled more than 100,000 miles, criss-crossing the Atlantic (six times) and taking in much of western Europe, plus Russia, north Africa and the Middle East.

These were all, no doubt, considered essential journeys by the war time leader, who famously liked to observe his allies close up and build personal relationships with them. What would he make of today’s incumbent at Number 10, one of his biggest fans, but now a reluctant traveller and a stay-at-home advocate?

Boris Johnson does have the pandemic to fret about but Churchill had U-boats and they didn’t deter his wanderlust.

For Britons desperate to escape to warmer climes this summer, to see their friends and family abroad, or just to flee the too familiar surroundings of their lockdown confinement, the government messaging over foreign travel is frustrating. Ministers have got in a twist in the past week over the definition of “amber”, but the advice that is most controversial is the distinction between who can and who cannot depart these shores.

On lifting the travel ban on Monday, Johnson said people should not go away unless they have “essential” reasons. But what is essential and who decides? Among the “small number” of reasons people can travel is work, but this discriminates against all those who either can’t blag a business trip or don’t have a job. 

The notion that holidays are irresponsible but business travel is justified goes unchallenged because it is easier to moralise over leisure than work. Yet work is a broad term that is open to interpretation. How many journeys have been made during lockdown on the pretext of business and how many of these were essential?

Meetings can be held online, as we have discovered – the PM even held a virtual G7 summit last March, though he plans to host world leaders (all from countries that are not on the green list) in person in Cornwall this June.

Travelling on the grounds of work is excusable in some circumstances – engineers, for example, or healthcare professionals may not be able to do their jobs via a screen. But an oil executive has arguably less need to fly to Houston for a conflab, than a family of four from Blackburn has to jet off to Crete for a summer break.

Captains of industry may look more important than the average package tourist, but in the age of Zoom is their jetsetting really necessary or are they just fed up with their families, or perhaps stocking up on duty free goods?

Holidaymakers tend to spend more time, and therefore more money, enjoying themselves than business travellers. They help keep afloat resorts and regions that often have few other sources of income or employment, which is why the EU is gearing up for holidaying Brits.

But aside from the financial benefits, leisure travel serves a purpose just as vital as business, even more so now when most of the population has been cooped up since last March.

Health minister Lord Bethell said this week that travelling is “not for this year”; for a hereditary peer, who presumably has spacious grounds, staying home will not be too much of a disappointment. For many Britons, though, the prospect of a fortnight of Mediterranean sunshine or simply a taste of overseas otherness is all that has kept them going these past pallid months.

Demand for flights suggests there is a determination to fulfil these dreams too, with up to 270,00 passengers due to fly to amber list countries by this weekend. This shows great British pluck, given that these travellers have been threatened with fines if they don’t quarantine on their return and even (though surely not seriously) electronic tagging, and must put up with test and trace contractors paying them home visits.

Transport secretary Grant Shapps said on Thursday that with the country unlocking, responsibility was starting to shift back to individuals. Does it not follow then, that what is deemed essential travel is an individual choice and not a decision for the government to make?

Our tennis players have been on court in the Lyon Open and our golfers are participating in the PGA championship in the US. Almost every day, newspapers share pictures of pleasure-seeking celebrities on the beaches of Lamu and other holiday hotspots.

If travel is safe for some, it is safe for us all.