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

Red Silurian

beggars_bush wrote: »

That would be a big step considering the volume of travel between the two countries

The attitude boris has had since the start of the pandemic is 'if ireland can do it then so can we' so if he sees cases creeping up which would potentially slow down his great reopening plan then I'd say he will act

Coillte_Bhoy

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Oh this old nonsense again :rolleyes:

You can roll your eyes all you want but that won't change the fact that they know nothing about fighting a pandemic and taking their advice from a Chief Medical Officer who doesn't care about the damage being done so long as the health service don't get found out.
It is your problem. I'm able to go pretty much where I please as the response where I reside has been measured and appropriate.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Lumen wrote: »

ORLY?

Major questions on whether India is doing enough testing. At the same time though India is such a big country its very hard to make national level declarations.

Red Silurian

Red Silurian wrote: »

Is your friend immune from carrying or spreading the virus though? The best the scientists will say is that your friend won't get sick from it and could still be an asymptomatic carrier

Oh, this old nonsense again. :rolleyes:
A person who isn't shedding, isn't propagating the virus.

maestroamado

beggars_bush wrote: »

That would be a big step considering the volume of travel between the two countries

I be very surprised if UK have MHQ for EU countries.
I do not think we should have done it either, either we in or out.
I expect it will not happen, i do not know if any EU citizen travelling from EU have being forced to stay in hotel.
Someone here will know...

Lumen

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Major questions on whether India is doing enough testing. At the same time though India is such a big country its very hard to make national level declarations.

Ok, so look at the positive rate. It's higher but not that much higher.

In any case, it demonstrates the difficulty of formulating an objective risk based policy that doesn't raise awkward questions about travel between EU countries.

Red Silurian

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh, this old nonsense again. :rolleyes:
A person who isn't shedding, isn't propagating the virus.

Is that your opinion or did you read it in a medical journal?

maestroamado wrote: »

I be very surprised if UK have MHQ for EU countries.
I do not think we should have done it either, either we in or out.
I expect it will not happen, i do not know if any EU citizen travelling from EU have being forced to stay in hotel.
Someone here will know...

Sure the UK government will be only too happy to put more distance again between themselves and the EU, and if it pisses off the higher ups in the EU then even better again

Red Silurian

Red Silurian wrote: »

Is that your opinion or did you read it in a medical journal?

It is a well known fact. This magic pestilence which has worked the more excitable in Society in to a tizzy can't be spread by people who aren't shedding.

faceman

gozunda wrote: »

Erm ok but tbf MHQ is fairly easy to avoid. Its aim is to discourage travel from countries that have significant issues with regard to Covid infection rates and/ or variants of concern...

Thing is people know they will have to quarantine when they're booking their tickets - so if people do insist on travelling ...

How is this relevant to the state confirming they are detaining people, legally, who haven’t committed a crime?

wrote:

Todate 18 people in MHQ here have tested positive for Covid-19 (of which four are probable variants of concern)

People keep waving this as if it’s the JFK magic bullet theory. So 18 people in MHQ, including staff have tested positive. We know at least 1 is a staff member. We don’t know what the split is between category 2 countries and people who arrived without a pcr test. This piece is information is crucial.

wrote:

And outside that yes I know thears compassionate needs for travelling etc.

This should have been addressed from the start. The fact that “elite sports people” were prioritised for exemption prior to any other groups says it all.

wrote:

Looks like NI has just came into line with MHQ within in the Common Travel Area

NI announces 10-day mandatory hotel quarantine for 'red list' arrivals

https://www.thejournal.ie/northern-ireland-mandatory-hotel-quarantine-5412688-Apr2021/?amp=1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=upday

In alignment with mainland U.K. policy as travel prepares to reopen next month. The U.K. couldn’t give 2 shits about Ireland. Sure they hardly care about Northern Ireland. There was very little coverage of the recent NI riots in U.K. news.

wrote:

Now how many were planning a travel dodge - are now going to have spend some time there I wonder? And the thing is - the lists of banned countries is subject to change ...

I agree with MHQ in certain circumstances. Namely people arriving without a pcr test and people arriving from non EU countries of concern. I don’t agree with it for Irish citizens or residents. There also needs to be a coherent exemption scheme that applies common sense

18 cases over the period of a few weeks compared to thousands of domestic cases in the same period none of which have any enforcement of quarantine.

It’s impossible to take MHQ serious when managing transmission domestically amounts to nothing beyond a few text messages.

Red Silurian

faceman wrote: »

18 cases over the period of a few weeks compared to thousands of domestic cases in the same period none of which have any enforcement of quarantine.

Those thousands of domestic cases of community transmission are being stamped out by lockdown and our vaccination rollout, the fact that 4 cases of a variant of concern are being held up before entering the community means we can slowly loosen restrictions on our everyday lives, and when positive cases in our managed quarantine system slow down we can slowly start removing countries from that again

Red Silurian

Red Silurian wrote: »

Those thousands of domestic cases of community transmission are being stamped out by lockdown and our vaccination rollout

So vaccination is appropriate for locals but those who are vaccinated before entering Ireland have some sort of biological differences which negate the benefits of vaccination. There is cognitive dissonance there in your viewpoints.

scouserstation

Deleted User wrote: »

Medical Officer but the Medical Officer is trying to absolve his institution of any blame.
In other Countries the integrity of the person has been upheld with respect to restrictions imposed on account of the Pandemic by a panel of judges in the Constitutional Court.
This has not happened here. Next stop would be Supreme Court but it looks unlikely that it will happen as the Lady is question will have then served her period of "detention".
Only positives which come out of this ruling is an acknowledgement that it is actually detention and an admission that there is no point appealing to a Civil Servant because the Barrister has said that a Civil Servant has no freedom to exercise their discretion.

It will be interesting to see the first court case of a family appealing against MHQ for a start it is definitely not legal to detain a child for any sort of prolonged period of time (if detention is the word being used in court) also can these hotels or places of detention honestly provide adequate accommodation for all family settings ie family members with disabilities, children with special needs etc

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So vaccination is appropriate for locals but those who are vaccinated before entering Ireland have some sort of biological differences which negate the benefits of vaccination. There is cognitive dissonance there in your viewpoints.

No the new rules will state that those who are fully vaccinated won't need to enter MHQ.

gozunda

faceman wrote: »

How is this relevant to the state confirming they are detaining people, legally, who haven’t committed a crime?

Jeez keep the hat on faceman :pac: But no quarantine regulations don't mean you have to commit any crime btw. Those that decide to travel know what they've signed up to. But the whole crime thing is a bit disingenuous anyway. There is precedence with regard to health regulations and effective quarantining here going back years.

faceman wrote: »

People keep waving this as if it’s the JFK magic bullet theory. So 18 people in MHQ, including staff have tested positive. We know at least 1 is a staff member. We don’t know what the split is between category 2 countries and people who arrived without a pcr test. This piece is information is crucial.

One thing I'm certain- is that the system will continue to catch positive casss. If it does that and it discourages others from travelling in the first place. Then its of benefit.

faceman wrote: »

In alignment with mainland U.K. policy as travel prepares to reopen next month. The U.K. couldn’t give 2 shits about Ireland. Sure they hardly care about Northern Ireland. There was very little coverage of the recent NI riots in U.K. news.

Hmm I think you'll find that Ireland and the UK tend to mirror each other with regard to travel regulations where it is mutually beneficial to do so.

faceman wrote: »

I agree with MHQ in certain circumstances. Namely people arriving without a pcr test and people arriving from non EU countries of concern. I don’t agree with it for Irish citizens or residents. There also needs to be a coherent exemption scheme that applies common sense
18 cases over the period of a few weeks compared to thousands of domestic cases in the same period none of which have any enforcement of quarantine. It’s impossible to take MHQ serious when managing transmission domestically amounts to nothing beyond a few text messages.

All those deciding to travel from red list countries whether Irish citizens or residents unfortunately carry the same level of risk as anyone else. Do you propose that they go directly to their residence? What happens then? As you said the current situation isn't really set up to deal with potential high risk.

And considering all non essential travel from other countries is also advised against with fines for those caught doing so - indicates that all those travel should quarantine. Do we mean we should put all them in hotels as well?

faceman

In the high court the other day, NPHET member Dr. Darina O’Flangan told the court that vaccines “would not work” against the SA strain....

Don’t let science get in the way of a bit of scaremongering Darina (acting behalf of the state’s defence)

Valhallapt

faceman wrote: »

In the high court the other day, NPHET member Dr. Darina O’Flangan told the court that vaccines “would not work” against the SA strain....

Don’t let science get in the way of a bit of scaremongering Darina (acting behalf of the state’s defence)

That’s outrageous, did she say that under oath?

faceman

gozunda wrote: »

Jeez keep the hat on faceman :pac: But no quarantine regulations don't mean you have to commit any crime btw. Those that decide to travel know what they've signed up to. But the whole crime thing is a bit disingenuous anyway. There is precedence with regard to health regulations and effective quarantining here going back years.

Let’s agree to disagree here. The state has confirmed its detention, there’s nothing further to add

wrote:

One thing I'm certain- is that the system will continue to catch positive casss. If it does that and it discourages others from travelling in the first place. Then its of benefit.

We need to know where though. Again those with pcr and those without. It’s relevant and important.

wrote:

Hmm I think you'll find that Ireland and the UK tend to mirror each other with regard to travel regulations where it is mutually beneficial to do so.

The U.K. hasn’t mirrored anything ireland has done through the pandemic in relation to travel. Even regular travelling, the U.K. doesn’t passport check people travelling from Ireland, whereas Ireland does check those travelling from the U.K.

wrote:

All those deciding to travel from red list countries whether Irish citizens or residents unfortunately carry the same level of risk as anyone else. Do you propose that they go directly to their residence? What happens then? As you said the current situation isn't really set up to deal with potential high risk.

Is that risk equal? Is a negative pcr test giving the same risk as no test? Granted I’m mostly ok with non EU countries being reviewed for MHQ as long as the criteria is transparent and measurable. The public should be able to foresee when a country is at risk of being added to the list.

wrote:

And considering all non essential travel from other countries is also advised against with fines for those caught doing so - indicates that all those travel should quarantine. Do we mean we should put all them in hotels as well?

We don’t put people in prison for illegal parking. The penalty has to be proportionate to risk. There are parts of the EU where risk is low.

But as I said before, until you put your domestic cases and their close contacts in detention centres then Ireland is pissing in the wind

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

No the new rules stare that those who are fully vaccinated won't need to enter MHQ.

Show new the Statutory Instrument from the Irish Statute book.
In the absence of this law show me those people who are going to book trips to Ireland without certainty that they won't have to quarantine at their expense in a bland airport hotel for 14 days assuming that somebody is ars3d enough to arrange their PCR test so that they are allowed be release from detention at the end of the 14 days.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0416/1210286-quarantine-high-court/

"Dr Darina O'Flanagan, who is also an adviser to the National Public Health Emergency Team, said the last thing she wanted was that in the summer there would be huge outbreaks of the South African variant here, against which vaccines would not work.
Dr O'Flanagan said current vaccines do not work as well against the South African and Brazilian variants, and it was really important to make sure they do not get a foothold in the country."
Either she is being misquoted or has a loose relationship with the truth.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Show new the Statutory Instrument from the Irish Statute book.
In the absence of this law show me those people who are going to book trips to Ireland without certainty that they won't have to quarantine at their expense in a bland airport hotel for 14 days assuming that somebody is ars3d enough to arrange their PCR test so that they are allowed be release from detention at the end of the 14 days.

So you're saying you haven't seen the news or is it that you don't believe the necessary changes are being made?

The Government is to allow fully vaccinated people to be exempt from staying in mandatory hotel quarantine, and will instead quarantine at home.

Pending legal changes that will be necessary, the change will come into effect in the coming days.

https://www.thejournal.ie/fully-vaccinated-exempt-from-mandatory-hotel-quarantine-5411338-Apr2021/

So no I won't show you the "Statutory Instrument" or "show you the people"????

faceman

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0416/1210286-quarantine-high-court/

"Dr Darina O'Flanagan, who is also an adviser to the National Public Health Emergency Team, said the last thing she wanted was that in the summer there would be huge outbreaks of the South African variant here, against which vaccines would not work.
Dr O'Flanagan said current vaccines do not work as well against the South African and Brazilian variants, and it was really important to make sure they do not get a foothold in the country."
Either she is being misquoted or has a loose relationship with the truth.

She was quoted the same in the Irish Times. Deplorable misinformation from an “expert”

Between her, McConkey, Staines, Scally, one has to wonder who sets the bar for these “experts”.

As Fr. Merrin once said, “He will lie to confuse us. But he will also mix lies with the truth to attack us. The attack is psychological, Damien, and powerful. So don't listen to him.” :pac:








(Ok perhaps I’m using a bit of creative license with that quote )

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

So you're saying you haven't seen the news or is it that you don't believe the necessary changes are being made?



https://www.thejournal.ie/fully-vaccinated-exempt-from-mandatory-hotel-quarantine-5411338-Apr2021/

So no I won't show you the "Statutory Instrument" or "show you the people"????

News means nothing. Statutory Instruments and laws are what determine whether vaccinated people have to quarantine in a hotel or not.
For the foreseeable future vaccinated people and those recovered from Corona are expected to enter MHQ.

gozunda

faceman wrote: »

Let’s agree to disagree here. The state has confirmed its detention, there’s nothing further to add

Except the only reason we have MHQ is to discourage unnecessary travel from areas with high rates of infection / voc and to help detect any additional infections from these areas for those who do travel.

faceman wrote: »

The U.K. hasn’t mirrored anything ireland has done through the pandemic in relation to travel. Even regular travelling, the U.K. doesn’t passport check people travelling from Ireland, whereas Ireland does check those travelling from the U.K.

I was referring to the Common Travel Area rights which can only be exercised by citizens of Ireland and the UK. If you are not a citizen of Ireland or the UK, you cannot exercise Common Travel Area rights. As a result citizens of both jurisdictions face less covid related restrictions than those out side the CTA.

The UK, for the purposes of the Common Travel Area, covers England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

Irish and UK citizens have the right to live, travel, work and study within the Common Travel Area. The rights of Irish citizens have been recognised in the UK’s Immigration and Social Security (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020.

Irish and UK citizens can live in either country and enjoy associated rights and privileges,

faceman wrote: »

Is that risk equal? Is a negative pcr test giving the same risk as no test? Granted I’m mostly ok with non EU countries being reviewed for MHQ as long as the criteria is transparent and measurable. The public should be able to foresee when a country is at risk of being added to the list.

"Public should be able to foresee"? Like them or otherwise - we voted in a (multi party) government. That's their job. John and Mary don't get to decide whether a restriction is not favourable for them

faceman wrote: »

We don’t put people in prison for illegal parking. The penalty has to be proportionate to risk. There are parts of the EU where risk is low. But as I said before, until you put your domestic cases and their close contacts in detention centres then Ireland is pissing in the wind

And again the less than subtle rephrasing from quarantine to detention (as opposed to being detained for public health reasons) to prison is a little facetious tbf.

Afaik there is no listing of all EU countries- just those who are deemed to be of risk with regard to travel.

That's about it

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

And again the less than subtle rephrasing from quarantine to detention (as opposed to being detained for public health reasons) to prison is a little facetious tbf.

People are being detained against their will.
Of those who are being detained many are being detained against their will for spurious public health reasons.
You speak as though it much ado about nothing.

faceman

gozunda wrote: »

Except the only reason we have MHQ is to discourage unnecessary travel from areas with high rates of infection / voc and to help detect any additional infections from these areas for those who do travel.

In principle that’s fair, in reality it has large implications on people who travel for essential reasons

wrote:

I was referring to the Common Travel Area rights which can only be exercised by citizens of Ireland and the UK. If you are not a citizen of Ireland or the UK, you cannot exercise Common Travel Area rights. As a result citizens of both jurisdictions face less covid related restrictions than those out side the CTA.

Point taken. I’m still convinced of alignment between nations though given we did impose a travel ban on U.K. travellers temporarily


[quote=
"Public should be able to foresee"? Like them or otherwise - we voted in a (multi party) government. That's their job. John and Mary don't get to decide whether a restriction is not favourable for them [/quote]

What I meant was a scheme similar to the reopen Europe map that indicates risk per area.

wrote:

And again the less than subtle rephrasing from quarantine to detention (as opposed to being detained for public health reasons) to prison is a little facetious tbf.

Afaik there is no listing of all EU countries- just those who are deemed to be of risk with regard to travel.

That's about it

Detained for public health reasons sounds great, but sadly given some of the choices on the list, which don’t meet the very loose criteria that is assessed, coupled with the misinformation shared by a NPHET member in court on Friday and the reveal that Ireland wanted to stall the EU travel very till September purely because of the lack of infrastructure to implement it, does give confidence that decisions are being made on public health grounds

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

People are being detained against their will.
Of those who are being detained many are being detained against their will for spurious public health reasons.
You speak as though it much ado about nothing.

Well people are choosing to travel - knowing that NHQ is required.

So you believe Covid-19 is "spurious public health reasons"? ... ok so

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Well people are choosing to travel - knowing that NHQ is required ..

So you believe Covid-19 is "spurious public health reasons"? ... ok so

You are twisting words. Detaining someone who isn't spreading the virus because they have already been immunized or vaccinated is "a spurious reason".

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You are twisting words. Detaining someone who isn't spreading the virus because they have already been immunized or vaccinated is "a spurious reason".

Nope. Just what it is.

We've already discussed that. Apparently the restrictions for those who are fully vaccinated are changing - and as such won't be required to enter into MHQ

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Nope. Just what it is.

We've already discussed that. Apparently the restrictions for those who are fully vaccinated are changing - and as such won't be required to enter into MHQ

And I've made it clear that nobody is going to travel until it is on the statute books. Are you just being obtuse? You are soundly beaten on this point.
The law enforces MHQ. The Minister will be in no hurry to adjust it for those who should never have been subject to the quarantine to begin with.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And I've made it clear that nobody is going to travel until it is on the statute books. Are you just being obtuse? You are soundly beaten on this point.
The law enforces MHQ. The Minister will be in no hurry to adjust it for those who should never have been subject to the quarantine to begin with.

Have you? Are you being "obtuse"? Because it Looks like the changes are already being processed. So yup that will be the new status quo. You are soundly beaten on this point. Eitherway where people choose to not travel in the first place - they won't be "subject the quarantine to begin with" will they?

Funnily enough the UK has no such exemption with regard to its MHQ ...

Edit. Update it seems its already in place

Minister must have been in a hurry ...

https://www.thejournal.ie/hotel-quarantine-exemptions-5406098-Apr2021/

Regulations have been signed and are in operation from today to allow for a limited number of exemptions from Mandatory Hotel Quarantine,” said Minister Donnelly

While fully vaccinated people travelling from a listed country will no longer need to be quarantined in a hotel, they are still obliged to quarantine at home for two weeks. They must also present a negative PCR test.

Happy?