Can we have some fcuking control on the airports from high risk countries please?

Sono Topolino

faceman wrote: »

*Sigh*

Zero credibility in the team who make recommendations as to who should be on the category 2 list.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/twelve-states-on-hotel-quarantine-list-have-covid-incidence-rates-of-below-10-1106470.html

This is the state's weakest point - we have a very activist judiciary and I don't think they'll look favourably on the arbitrary use of executive power here.

Alast

Also what is the point is of MHQ if COVID is rampant in Ireland.

This system will have NO impact in daily COVID cases

Car99

Has the DUBAI BOOB JOB THREAD been deleted?

Ace2007

Alast wrote: »

Which is their right as a Irish citizen/resident

They have a right to return to Ireland - but don't have the right to do so for free, or not pay an expenses that they are required to. Why should they have paid for the fight home? Should they be getting allowed to get that free?

Alast

Ace2007 wrote: »

They have a right to return to Ireland - but don't have the right to do so for free, or not pay an expenses that they are required to. Why should they have paid for the fight home? Should they be getting allowed to get that free?

Simple enforce at home quarantine thats get enforced by Garda.

And that should apply to all "high risk" country travellers and not just these 2.

MHQ is wrong in all situations.

ebbsy

2 braindead women, that is what the 2 of them are.

Ace2007

Alast wrote: »

Simple enforce at home quarantine thats get enforced by Garda.

And that should apply to all "high risk" country travellers and not just these 2.

MHQ is wrong in all situations.

Why? Just because you believe it to be wrong? What if for instance their last test was a false negative, and they have covid - and past it onto one of their kids - who then went to school and past it onto their class.

What if it emerges in a month's time there is a new variant which originated in the middle east.

The arguments on here are basically anti authority.

ebbsy

Car99 wrote: »

Has the DUBAI BOOB JOB THREAD been deleted?

Where ?

Alast

Ace2007 wrote: »

Why? Just because you believe it to be wrong? What if for instance their last test was a false negative, and they have covid - and past it onto one of their kids - who then went to school and past it onto their class.

What if it emerges in a month's time there is a new variant which originated in the middle east.

The arguments on here are basically anti authority.

You can get COVID from visiting your local Centra/Tesco/Lidl, be a-symptomatic, spread it to your kids and and infect everyone around you.

COVID is rampant in Ireland. People traveling had a recent test showing they do not have COVID.

Away With The Fairies

Ace2007 wrote: »

Why? Just because you believe it to be wrong? What if for instance their last test was a false negative, and they have covid - and past it onto one of their kids - who then went to school and past it onto their class.

What if it emerges in a month's time there is a new variant which originated in the middle east.

The arguments on here are basically anti authority.

And variants not being picked up by PCR as well.

Ace2007

Alast wrote: »

You can get COVID from visiting your local Centra/Tesco/Lidl, be a-symptomatic, spread it to your kids and and infect everyone around you.

COVID is rampant in Ireland. People traveling had a recent test showing they do not have COVID.

No, they have a test that was negative, doesn't mean that they don't have COVID - could be false positive like I said.

Why should we have any laws if that's your attitude?

Why did you join boards now to complain and not last week when others were quarantined - perhaps a personal interest in this case?

titan18

High court seems to have ruled they must stay in the hotel quarantine.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0404/1207878-courts-quarantine/

Sono Topolino

Ace2007 wrote: »

Why? Just because you believe it to be wrong? What if for instance their last test was a false negative, and they have covid - and past it onto one of their kids - who then went to school and past it onto their class.

What if it emerges in a month's time there is a new variant which originated in the middle east.

The arguments on here are basically anti authority.

I'm actually pro-authority with conditions - those conditions namely being that measures taken should be proportional, consistent and balancing public health with individual liberty ONLY.

Here's a summary of what I support vs what we have:

Mandatory centralised quarantine for anyone testing positive

Why is it a good idea? People who test positive will be immediately taken into quarantine and unable to spread the infection. While in quarantine, they will be fed, checked on regularly by health care professionals and if they do not have symptoms, have designated exercise hours away from other people.

What do we have instead? People who test positive for Covid-19 are forced to fend for themselves. They're required to isolate, but if they live alone then they in practice are left to buy their own groceries etc. If their condition worsens, they often have to make their way to hospital using public transport, endangering other people.

10 day Mandatory hotel quarantine for all passengers arriving from regions with higher incidence rate than Ireland

Why is this a good idea? It prevents new variants from outside of Ireland entering the state and keeps our incidence rate low.

What do we actually have? A hodge podge list which is based on a convoluted mix of public health, diplomatic and opaque priorities.

I think most people are perfectly happy to sacrifice their personal freedom for the public good - but it should be done in a proportional and consistent way, based on a formula which is transparent and easily understood.

Ace2007

titan18 wrote: »

High court seems to have ruled they must stay in the hotel quarantine.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0404/1207878-courts-quarantine/

folk in here won't be happy

ninebeanrows

Ace2007 wrote: »

folk in here won't be happy

It is not the end of the matter.

However, following discussions between lawyers for the parties, that action has now been converted into a constitutional challenge against laws requiring persons to enter mandatory quarantine on their arrival into Ireland from certain countries.

Sono Topolino

titan18 wrote: »

High court seems to have ruled they must stay in the hotel quarantine.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0404/1207878-courts-quarantine/

It will be interesting to see what the supreme court says (if the case goes there).

titan18

ninebeanrows wrote: »

It is not the end of the matter.

I think they'll still have to quarantine in the hotel or stay in prison as that challenge happens though.

Ace2007

ninebeanrows wrote: »

It is not the end of the matter.

Well it is for them, because despite them stating their kids needed them, they won't be able to see them for at least 10 days - whose going to look after them?

The constitutional challenge will take months, and by then majority of country will be vaccinated and rules relaxed.

Sono Topolino

Ace2007 wrote: »

Well it is for them, because despite them stating their kids needed them, they won't be able to see them for at least 10 days - whose going to look after them?

The constitutional challenge will take months, and by then majority of country will be vaccinated and rules relaxed.

Not really. The Supreme Court could make a determination on whether to free them within days, place a stay on the law and publish a substantive opinion in six months time.

titan18

Sono Topolino wrote: »

Not really. The Supreme Court could make a determination on whether to free them within days, place a stay on the law and publish a substantive opinion in six months time.

I doubt they'll be doing anything today or tomorrow so you're probably likely looking towards end of the week at the earliest

Ace2007

titan18 wrote: »

I doubt they'll be doing anything today or tomorrow so you're probably likely looking towards end of the week at the earliest

Should someone call social services - given that there is no one to look after the kids now?

Sono Topolino

Sono Topolino wrote: »

Articles 40.3 and 40.4.

The state is obliged to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen under 40.3. No citizen may be deprived of their personal liberty save "in accordance with the law." The state is also obliged to protect the citizen from "unjust attack".

Clearly liberty in this case is being deprived in accordance with the law, but the question is whether this law violates the state's obligation to vindicate the personal rights of the citizen and whether it amounts to an "unjust attack".

The answer to that is yes - because the states on the quarantine list have been added in an arbitrary fashion. And that is before I even get into the stupidity of forcing Irish citizens to pay for their own detention.

Quarantining travelers for public health reasons is not unconstitutional per se, but the state has completely made a mess of this and I expect the Supreme Court will take a dim view.

Right, so we agree that it's not unconstitutional.

The law itself may be flawed but that's separate.

And again, high court was only looking into the bail restrictions.

Sono Topolino

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Right, so we agree that it's not unconstitutional.

The law itself may be flawed but that's separate.

And again, high court was only looking into the bail restrictions.

No we do not agree - the law is clearly unconstitutional. MHQ is not necessarily unconstitutional, but this law is.

faceman

It was inevitable that the judge would move them from the prison to the hotel and not send them home.

The girls are irrelevant now. It’s the high court case that matters

Jane98

From RTE
"The judge also noted that there was also a waiver scheme in the Act for persons who cannot afford to pay the costs of quarantining in the hotel."

expectationlost

"As of March 26, there were 31 cases of the South African variant, along with 12 cases each of the P1 and P2 Brazilian variants, in the Republic of Ireland." https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/covid-ireland-more-eu-states-quarantine-list-nrcbf28wn

Ace2007

Jane98 wrote: »

From RTE
"The judge also noted that there was also a waiver scheme in the Act for persons who cannot afford to pay the costs of quarantining in the hotel."

So all that remains now is for the two women to go to the hotel, if they ask nicely they might get a room in the Clontarf castle hotel

Red Silurian

Ace2007 wrote: »

Should someone call social services - given that there is no one to look after the kids now?

Possibly, the mothers have a lot to answer for, off over to UAE for a boob job and leaving the kids with somebody who couldn't look after them during their quarantine

standardg60

Jane98 wrote: »

From RTE
"The judge also noted that there was also a waiver scheme in the Act for persons who cannot afford to pay the costs of quarantining in the hotel."

I was asking about this on another thread, they had already been given waiver letters in Dubai. It's the ad-hoc nature of this scheme, bizarrely being administered by the foreign affairs dept., which should be given more scrutiny as to it's transparency. They were given waivers after interventions by Christy Burke and Simon Coveney. As to what investigations were made to establish non affordability your guess is as good as mine.

Sono Topolino

Sono Topolino wrote: »

No we do not agree - the law is clearly unconstitutional. MHQ is not necessarily unconstitutional, but this law is.

So then I'm back to asking how so and on what basis.

Interested to hear the answer and see how it compares to the final decision considering the application was changed after a reduced bail was agreed by both sides. So we should see if it is declared unconstitutional soon enough