Then let me be more explicit, Nigel. There is an obvious difference between countries who are committed to free movement but, in full accordance with the legislation allowing temporary restrictions during a pandemic (and fully committed to reopening those borders once the emergency is passed) on the one hand, and on the other a country that has decided not to have free movement at all. There is no inconsistency, in either Guardian or the EU on this: just the expectation that the reader/citizen is able to apply a little thought to distinguish temporary and permenant relationships.