What questions would you ask of the post-Covid world?

Should we ban cars from cities?

CITY life needs reshaped – coronavirus has taught us that much. It’ll be a long time until consumers pack out shopping districts again. In a world of social distancing, pavements need to get bigger, and so roads need to get smaller. We’ve all noticed how fresh the air is now car travel has dropped. Many have taken to cycling.

Reimagining the shape of our cities and our relationship with the car really isn’t revolutionary. Birmingham had already moved to ban private cars taking trips through the city before coronavirus. York announced plans to ban private car journeys last year.

In an age of declining income, we’ll need more, not less, public transport – especially as social distancing will mean fewer people able to travel on individual buses and trains. The car will have to move out of the way when it comes to city life.

Our cities need greened as well. More parks, not more pound stores. The rise of online shopping points that way already. A park could create as many jobs as a pound store – with coffee stalls, groundkeepers and fitness advisers.

As high street shops, pubs and restaurants are mothballed by profitdriven shareholders, so smaller, less greedy, individually-owned enterprises will replace them. With our high streets dying, cities could become places of outdoor and indoor leisure ringed by entrepreneurial local firms providing food, drink and entertainment: a stroll in a city-centre garden followed by a snack at a locally-owned cafe, a movie at an independent cinema and then a drink in a locally-owned pub. Turn abandoned city-centre properties into social housing.

Declining international tourism will also reshape cities. It’s already happening in Venice. We’re entering the age of rail again. More holidays will be via trains to Cornwall, not planes to Malaga.

Are we becoming slaves to medicine?

CORONAVIRUS has two good consequences: first, we’ve focused more on our personal health; second, we’ve finally recognised the value of NHS workers. However, we need to beware this doesn’t tip over into extremes. After the First World War, veterans were put on a pedestal – no wrong could be said

Send your questions ... and your answers ... to sunday-letters@ theherald.co.uk of them. We don’t want that for doctors and nurses.

First, they’re ordinary people, and we know that before coronavirus medics made mistakes just like other professionals. If we describe people only as “heroes” we cannot objectively value their contribution to society – and NHS workers contribute vastly.

Second, if we call people “heroes” we tend not to ask if those heroes need pay rises. Nurses need recompense, but so far we’ve only “clapped for carers”, not demanded decent salaries.

Finally, we’re at risk of elevating health into a cult. In a post-coronavirus world, will smokers, the overweight, someone who drinks or those who aren’t fit enough be penalised for their lifestyles in a society that has become too health-conscious? We know such thinking has been around for years.

Coronavirus must leave a legacy, but not one were the simplest joys are frowned upon.

Is it time to crack down on social media?

ONE of the most disturbing aspects of the pandemic has been the spread of conspiracy theories online. From 5G links to claims of Chinese labs releasing the virus, lies have multiplied throughout lockdown.

Until Wednesday – when Twitter tried to rein in Donald Trump – social media did nothing to stem the tide of dangerous disinformation. However, as Twitter faced threats of retribution from Trump, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg attacked the rival company saying it wasn’t the place of social media to interfere with free speech.

Social media is a publisher – just like the owners of this newspaper. Facebook disseminates information just like the BBC. As such, Facebook and Twitter should be subject to the same laws as newspapers at the very minimum. Some would argue social media should be restricted as severely as broadcasters.

This newspaper cannot publish a letter calling for murder or rape, nor can it publish deliberate lies. Laws hold the old media to account. New media must play by the same rules.

Is it time to end charity?

CHARITY is the mark of a person’s humanity. When practised properly there’s no higher moral action. But we live in a society were charity fills in for Government failure. It was ordinary people who raised millions for protective hospital gear.

There’s a simple fix for this – proper taxation. Are you happy to pay a few more pennies in tax so no child goes hungry, or do you prefer Children in Need taking on the role of the Treasury?

Equally fraught is the question of foreign aid. Covid is reordering priorities. Should aid go to nations like India, with its own space programme? Or to nations that seemingly need it more. At the very least, an intelligent national debate is required, free from racism and concepts like “deserving poor”.

Do we need a wealth revolution?

INEQUALITY has advanced steadily since the 1970s – and yet we know that societies with greater income equality are happier and healthier.

It’s not utopian to stop offshore tax avoidance, to make multinationals pay their fair share. It’s not revolutionary to say that a billionaire could pay 1960s levels of tax and still have more money than they’d ever spend in 10 lifetimes. It’s not radical to inflict heavier waste taxes on polluting corporations, or limit corporate political donations.

Throughout coronavirus we’ve seen large companies prioritise money over people. Worker participation in companies would end that. If every board had half of its membership elected from the workforce, shareholder greed would be curbed, unnecessary layoffs prevented, pay fairly apportioned, rights protected, staff respected.

The workplace must be reimagined. A four-day week – as long as it doesn’t lower worker wages – might be one way to improve quality of life for the majority. The debate about a universal basic income, however, too often misses the fact that it could institutionalise poverty.

Coronavirus has shown us the brutality of inequality. The poor are dying faster than the rich. There’s a growing groundswell of intellectual opinion that a society which judges itself purely by GDP – by wealth – is a failed society. Why not judge ourselves by higher standards like a GDP in happiness, health, wellbeing, freedom, education.

Our societies are too stratified. The rich live here, the poor there, the middle class somewhere in between. Top-quality social housing would even out disparities. A good society would see a plumber living beside a doctor, and a teacher beside a shop worker – not in class-based enclaves.

The biggest change of all would be learning how others live – not just those in the same bubble as ourselves.