The Daily Star's FREE newsletter is spectacular! Sign up today for the best stories straight to your inbox Sign up today! Thank you for subscribing See our privacy notice Invalid Email

Health Secretary Matt Hancock said the government is planning a "passport" for people who have had coronavirus and beaten the bug.

He revealed the news on Thursday during the daily coronavirus briefing as he confirmed 33,718 people in the UK have tested positive, and 2,921 have now died.

"We are looking at an immunity certificate," he announced.

"How people who have had the disease have got the antibodies and therefore have the immunity can show that and so get back as much as possible to normal life.

"That is an important thing that we will be doing and are looking at, but it's too early in the science of the immunity that comes from having the disease that Steve [Medical Director of NHS England, Prof. Steve Powis] spoke about earlier.

(Image: 10 Downing Street/AFP via Getty)

"It's too early in that science to be able to put clarity around that.

"I wish that we could but the reason that we can't is because the science isn't yet advanced enough.

"But we have a programme of work on to understand the immunity that you get out of this, which is a global piece of work. And what you then do for people who have had the disease.

"And believe you me I have a very strong, personal interest in this one now that I've been through it."

However, plans for the immunity certificates have been branded "dangerous" and unnecessary by a health expert.

(Image: Getty Images)

Eleanor Riley, Professor of Immunology and Infectious Disease at the University of Edinburgh, said that such certificates would give people a "sense of false security" about the disease.

"It's not something that we've ever done before. When we vaccinate people, particularly for certain diseases where they're going to travel overseas... we give people a certificate saying they have been vaccinated," she said.

"But that certificate doesn't say they are immune and there's a difference. We don't know yet whether somebody who has had this virus is immune.

"They have antibodies, they've clearly been exposed, yet will those antibodies protect them against reinfection? I'm not sure that we know that. "

(Image: 10 Downing Street/AFP via Getty)

She continued: "So to give a certificate saying somebody is immune, I think is actually quite dangerous because: A, we don't know if it's true and B, it could give people a slight sense of false security, where they start to do things that they wouldn't otherwise do.

"For the general public, saying you're immune they will think 'oh OK, I don't need to worry anymore' - and there will be people who will die as a result of that.

"I think it's very risky and I don't think it's necessary."

The Department of Health said it could not currently provide further information on the plan to issue certificates as it was "too early in the science of immunity".

"As the technology develops and becomes clearer we will be able to update," a spokesperson said.

Prof Riley added that the exact purpose of immunity certificates was unclear for the general public.

"Who needs a certificate that says they're immune to coronavirus? What are you going to use it for?" she said.

"For health service workers in the very particular instance of 'are you safe to go back to work?' it might be useful.

"For anybody else I really don't see the benefit of it - A, at an individual level it's not informative and B, if people think they are immune they will start to take risks and any attempt at social distancing will start to break down."

Mr Hancock also confirmed in the briefing that the government has bought 17.5 million tests.

He added: "As I said, the early results of some of them has not performed well but we're hopeful that they will improve and that the later tests that we've got our hands on will be reliable enough for people to use them with confidence."