Are we there yet? Your second Travel Megathread (threadbans in OP}

Multipass

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I really dont understand this notion.

On that basis we should just copy all UK laws and scrap any that dont match up because 'hey, they will just travel anyway'

while we are at it, why dont we just legalise all the warped **** that happens in Thailand and African nagtions because of the underage sex tourists?

You are still committing a crime by going via Belfast and not following the mandated PCR / Quarantine requirements but we dont just abandon laws because some people avoid them

What bizarre logic. If something so damaging and costly is obviously not even going to work, let’s put our fingers in our ears and shout ‘nah nah’

gozunda

Blut2 wrote: »

The "travel insurance won't cover you" thing is a bit of a myth. A lot of papers reported on it as "your travel insurance might not cover you" and people decided to take that as fact.

I've traveled multiple times in the last year, and rang my travel insurance provider before doing so the first time and they told me I was covered. My girlfriend, whos with a different travel insurance provider, also rang hers before her first post-corona trip and was told she was covered.

A "myth". I somehow doubt that

And to be fair it depends on where you are going and the purpose of travel essential vs essential.

And its not unknown for some insurance companies to sell insurance but will use just about any clause to get out of actually covering incidences such as those being stuck for an extended period in another jurisdiction due to a change of a countries covid travel status as happened last year.

gozunda

Micky 32 wrote: »

I’m not sure why you stomped your feet and gave a big long shyte lecture on the dangers of travel toward the poster who is obviously worried about their job. The poster never said open the doors right up. End of July was mentioned. Btw aren’t you involved in farming if my memory serves me correctly? I’m sure you’re doing ok during this pandemic nothing to see here.

Micky - what are you on about?

None of that bears any similarly to anything which was said as part of the discussion I had with another poster. Which you bizarrely decided to "stomp" all over.

So yeah I guess even more mirepresentations and personalisation.

The constant crystal ball gazing on those you disagree with is a bit puerile tbf.

I've taken this off you. :rolleyes: its safer here I think ...

Blut2

gozunda wrote: »

We to be fair it depends on where you are going and the purpose of travel essential vs essential.

And its not unknown for some insurance companies to sell insurance but will use just about any clause to get out of actually covering incidences such as those being stuck for an extended period in another jurisdiction due to a change of a countries covid travel status as happened last year.

Thats just not true at all - my travel insurance provider, and hers, both said we were covered as normal. There was no need for the travel to be essential, or to a particular country, anything else.

Theres no point in spreading rumours if you have no first hand experience of this yourself.

Valhallapt

Blut2 wrote: »

Thats just not true at all - my travel insurance provider, and hers, both said we were covered as normal. There was no need for the travel to be essential, or to a particular country, anything else.

Theres no point in spreading rumours if you have no first hand experience of this yourself.

Anyways really no need to have travel insurance within the EU

gozunda

Blut2 wrote: »

Thats just not true at all - my travel insurance provider, and hers, both said we were covered as normal. There was no need for the travel to be essential, or to a particular country, anything else.Theres no point in spreading rumours if you have no first hand experience of this yourself.

Well as nice as anecdotal stories are. The comment was based on travel company details and reports from those who took out insurance for travel last year, got stuck and ended up with no cover.

But yes - if your travel is essential - then there is no question you are covered. Non essential especially where such travel is not state sanctioned - then you run the risk of not being covered.

But hey whatever.

Micky 32

gozunda wrote: »

Micky - what are you on about?

None of that bears any similarly to anything which was said as part of the discussion I had with another poster. Which you bizarrely decided to "stomp" all over.

So yeah I guess even more mirepresentations and 'shyte' personalisation.

The constant crystal ball gazing on those you disagree with is a bit puerile tbf.

So you’re not a farmer then?

I love the way you’re trying to deflect. You came out with a big condescending arrogant spiel on the dangers of travelling to another poster who is concerned about his job at the airport. You then ranted about “just throwing the doors open” the poster never suggested that. I don’t need a crystal ball to tell me that. Will ya stop posting shyte. :rolleyes:

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

Apples and Oranges, Ireland’s restrictions are disproportionate. No other country is fining people for going to an airport.

More lies from you!
The fine is not for going to The airport.

Multipass

Multipass wrote: »

What bizarre logic. If something so damaging and costly is obviously not even going to work, let’s put our fingers in our ears and shout ‘nah nah’

Its not bizaare.

This state has laws, the fact that people can go to another jurisdiction to bypass those laws doesnt mean we should just throw the towel in.

Thats your argument and I pointed out the foolishness of adopting that approach

titan18

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I really dont understand this notion.

On that basis we should just copy all UK laws and scrap any that dont match up because 'hey, they will just travel anyway'

while we are at it, why dont we just legalise all the warped **** that happens in Thailand and African nagtions because of the underage sex tourists?

You are still committing a crime by going via Belfast and not following the mandated PCR / Quarantine requirements but we dont just abandon laws because some people avoid them

Yes, if the law is easily circumvented to the point of it being unenforceable, it's about as useful as writing the law on toilet paper.

Valhallapt

bubblypop wrote: »

More lies from you!
The fine is not for going to The airport.

My understanding is that the SI was to give a FPN for going to a port?

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

My understanding is that the SI was to give a FPN for going to a port?

Nope. Anyone can go to the airport. The fine is for travelling to the airport for the purpose of leaving the state for non essential travel.

gozunda

Valhallapt wrote: »

There is some denial on this thread, some seem to think that other countries are locked down like Ireland.
Ireland has the most stringent lockdown in Europe by far. I decided to rent out my Portugal home on Airbnb this year, I texted the people who rented it out to see if all was ok, they replied, “out getting drunk”, “everything open” . Same when I speak to friends in Poland, Slovakia, Germany and Norway. Yes some restrictions are in place, but they are sensible, proportionate and are common sense.

I'd agree there certainly some denial for sure.
But as nice as anecdotal stories are they don't tend to stand up to scrutiny.

As for other EU countries and stringency. So some here keep saying. But oddly enough most of those claims don't seem to stand up to scrutiny.

You mentioned countries such as Norway as having "some restrictions are in place, but they are sensible, proportionate and are common sense"

You do know that the Norwegian border remains closed to many non-residents in a bid to halt the further spread of coronavirus variants into Norway?

https://www.lifeinnorway.net/coronavirus-in-norway/

As for other EU countries having restrictions which were "sensible, proportionate and are common sense"? Many would disagree there ...

Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Romania, Serbia, Poland, France and Britain all saw demonstrations of varying magnitude and with various local factors coming into play.

Across Europe, protesters railed against the "dictatorship" of pandemic health restrictions and what they see as an attack on fundamental freedoms.

But the demonstrations also featured a strong element of pandemic denial, fuelled by misinformation. "Stop the Corona terror" or "COVID is a hoax" were common slogans on signs.

^ Tbh reminds me a bit of this thread on occasion...

https://www.euronews.com/2021/03/21/covid-19-protests-across-europe-rail-against-pandemic-restrictions-as-infections-soar

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

don’t stop them going.

Valhallapt wrote: »

not allowing the reuniting of families as its non essential.

Your continued twisting of the situation does your arguement no good.

Not a single person has been denied travel. Not a single person has been stopped going and not a single person has been "not allowed" reunite with family.

We can all do that, we could take a country in the EU and twist their situation to be more grim and restrictive than it currently is but when you need to do that, you have lost the arguement.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Well as nice as anecdotal stories are. The comment was based on reports from those who took out insurance for travel last year, got stuck and ended up with no cover.

But yes - if your travel is essential - then there is no question you are covered. Non essential especially where such travel is not state sanctioned - then you run the risk of not being covered.

But hey whatever.

Valid travel insurance is easily purchssed now outside the state which will cover you for all and sundry regardless of dfa travel advice

Valhallapt

bubblypop wrote: »

Nope. Anyone can go to the airport. The fine is for travelling to the airport for the purpose of leaving the state for non essential travel.

But you just claimed the fine wasn’t for going to the airport?? Seeing as this thread is all about travel, it’s pretty pedantic to call me a liar for not pointing out the bloody obvious.

titan18

titan18 wrote: »

Yes, if the law is easily circumvented to the point of it being unenforceable, it's about as useful as writing the law on toilet paper.

Well first off it is enforceable as much as any other law on the books. Its exactly as bypassable as any other law on the books so again, we should legalise underage sex because people can freely travel to avail of it? Drugs as well? What about Smuggling in full? Its estimated that only 10% of smuggled items are caught so we should just stop trying?

The simple reality is that ALL laws are only enforceable within the state. Thats the way it is and people aren being fined, people are being caught not quarantining, not having valid tests and are being brough to the MHQ.

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

But you just claimed the fine wasn’t for going to the airport?? Seeing as this thread is all about travel, it’s pretty pedantic to call me a liar for not pointing out the bloody obvious.

and its not for going to the airport.

Theres no fine for driving. There is however for drink driving. See the difference?

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

Was chatting to a neighbour, his young lad is off to albufiera with 7 of his mates Friday morning. I asked “what about the fines”, he said those were all gone... I didn’t correct, will report back how he gets on.

Update on this, the lads got the bus and didn’t see any gardai inside the airport

gozunda

Micky 32 wrote: »

So you’re not a farmer then? I love the way you’re trying to deflect. You came out with a big condescending arrogant spiel on the dangers of travelling to another poster who is concerned about his job at the airport. You then ranted about “just throwing the doors open” the poster never suggested that. I don’t need a crystal ball to tell me that. Will ya stop posting shyte.

Micky is this discussion about me and you're bizarre attacks on posters you don't agree with?

I've had a good (and polite) discussion on this with other posters. And youre still throwing "shyte"? Why is that Micky?

Btw I've no intention of engaging into same puerile bs

I've taken this lad from you again :rolleyes:


Bye.

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

But you just claimed the fine wasn’t for going to the airport?? Seeing as this thread is all about travel, it’s pretty pedantic to call me a liar for not pointing out the bloody obvious.

No, you are making things up, and making things appear worse, for some reason only known to yourself.
There is no fine for 'going to the airport'

gozunda

Marine Layer wrote: »

Valid travel insurance is easily purchssed now outside the state which will cover you for all and sundry regardless of dfa travel advice

I think the original context was the UK and travel to Amber list countries. But yes dfa travel advisories is relevant for travel to destination countries for Irish travellers.

This is the current advice regarding holiday insurance fom a UK Travel company

Depending on which amber country you are travelling to, you should always check the individual U.K. government advice, as there may be different advice for different parts of that country.

Looking at popular Spain as an example, the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) currently advises “against all but essential travel to Spain, including the Balearic Islands but excluding the Canary Islands, based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.” This means that for Spain, from 17 May when the travel ban ends, the U.K. government advice is that you can travel to the Canary Islands for a holiday, but for the time being, you should not travel to the rest of Spain for a non-essential reason.

As was the case last summer, this government advice is critical when it comes to your travel insurance. Most regular travel insurance policies will be invalid where you choose to travel to a destination against FCDO advice. Insurance giant AXA, for example, states the following: “A number of our policies no longer cover cancellation or curtailment if the FCDO or another regulatory body advises against travel due to a pandemic.

This means for Spain as an example, an AXA travel insurance policy is unlikely to cover travel to mainland Spain while this amber-related travel advice exists. It would cover travel to the Canary Islands, as no advice against travel exists to the Canary Islands.

If you do want to travel to an amber destination where there is FCDO advises against doing so and still want to be covered with travel insurance, some specialist providers have launched COVID travel insurance for these situations, where traditional travel insurance policies may be invalid. These COVID policies may be more expensive and have different exclusions to traditional policies, so you should carefully read the fine print before selecting a policy to understand what is covered and what is not.

https://thepointsguy.co.uk/guide/travel-insurance-amber-country/

dalyboy

Micky 32 wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.rte.ie/amp/1223436/

Quarantine to target variants.

“Minister for Environment, Climate, Communications and Transport Eamon Ryan has said that the mandatory hotel quarantine system will be refined to target Covid-19 variants of real concern.”

“ He said it would be targeted especially to variants that may escape vaccines.”

So does that mean they are scrapping MHQ ? The reason I ask is because none of variants are escaping any of the vaccines.

Valhallapt

bubblypop wrote: »

No, you are making things up, and making things appear worse, for some reason only known to yourself.
There is no fine for 'going to the airport'

SI 217

Directly from the statute book:


“Restrictions of movement of applicable persons in relation to travel from place of residence to port or airport”

Seeing as this is a thread about travel, I’m hardly talking about popping in to the McDonald’s there!

I’ve constantly said the problem is with what’s essential, allowing families reunite should be allowed, Ireland has stricter rules than anywhere else in Europe.

Whenever we do put the cert in place even if it is mid August, does that mean non vaccinated children will not need to home quarantine at all on return to Ireland from Europe?

Ray Donovan

naufragos123 wrote: »

Why are you so pessimistic? What are you basing that on?

I’m basing that on all the evidence of the last 15 months with regards all decisions taken in the interests of public health.

We have a Taoiseach who is afraid to make a decision and has been ultra conservative and has hidden behind public health since his appointment.

We have a CMO who is a law onto himself and seems to have a Carte Blanche to make any decision he likes without being questioned about it. He is quite obviously anti travel among other things.

I won’t get started on our Minister for Health.

Every single decision made by these people over the last year has been to the detriment of people’s hopes. This won’t suddenly end with a lifting of the travel ban in a couple of weeks. Nothing they have done up to now points to anything other than a continuation of the “abundance of caution” when it comes to travel.

Fact of the matter is on June 21st Coronavirus will be over in England with all restrictions lifted, but in Ireland it will still be a penal offence to leave the country for leisure activities. Go figure.

Valhallapt

Valhallapt wrote: »

SI 217

Directly from the statute book:


“Restrictions of movement of applicable persons in relation to travel from place of residence to port or airport”

Seeing as this is a thread about travel, I’m hardly talking about popping in to the McDonald’s there!

I’ve constantly said the problem is with what’s essential, allowing families reunite should be allowed, Ireland has stricter rules than anywhere else in Europe.

Ireland does not have stricter rules then other EU countries. They have all had strict rules and regulations at different stages over the last 14 months.
Lots of countries do not allow non essential travellers to enter.
Families can unite, why do you think they cannot?

Btw, there is more to a law then the title, you have to actually read the law you know....

gozunda

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Your continued twisting of the situation does your arguement no good.

Not a single person has been denied travel. Not a single person has been stopped going and not a single person has been "not allowed" reunite with family.

We can all do that, we could take a country in the EU and twist their situation to be more grim and restrictive than it currently is but when you need to do that, you have lost the arguement.

Unfortunately that seems to be a fairly common theme ...

Happydays2020

I am expecting that I will fully vaccinated by 1st week July at the latest.

I decide mid July to go to Greece for 4 weeks. Greece may or may not require a PCR (ok for me). But Ireland will not have the digital Covid certificate until mid August (if at all).

As Ireland has vaccinated me, I presume no quarantine requirement on return to Ireland. Or indeed a PCR test? I will have evidence via the Covid vaccination portal that I am vaccinated.

Blut2

gozunda wrote: »

Well as nice as anecdotal stories are. The comment was based on travel company details and reports from those who took out insurance for travel last year, got stuck and ended up with no cover.

But yes - if your travel is essential - then there is no question you are covered. Non essential especially where such travel is not state sanctioned - then you run the risk of not being covered.

But hey whatever.

Again, do you have any first hand experience of traveling in the last year and not being covered by travel insurance? Because it sounds like you're basing your opinion on vague newspaper articles, and trying to pass that off as scaremongered "facts". I'm telling you my personal, first hand experience with this.

There is no travel insurance company in Ireland whos going to ask you to prove your travel was essential when the list of acceptable essential travel reasons includes so many vague reasons such as "To work or travel related to your business" and "To care for a family member or for other vital family reasons". The accepted reasons are completely subjective and unverifiable.

I'd recommend anyone considering travel to just ring their travel insurance provider if they're at all worried about not being covered.