Mandatory quarantine hotels - when and how much notice

I don't get the anger here.

If you don't want to do the quarantine, stay put wherever you are, instead of getting angry over hypotheticals.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't get the anger here.

If you don't want to do the quarantine, stay put wherever you are, instead of getting angry over hypotheticals.

Ironic that your own turn of phrase mirrors the misgivings about this arrangement. I don't know why people may want to travel but I am aware of a number who want to return to loved ones. The real flaw of this system is that it is based on claims that science has yet to prove to be true, but it has been hidden under the public health banner anyway. The beauty of it is that there is no political opposition to it so it doesn't matter if people have questions about it.

Rodin

fran38 wrote: »

The person who stays in the hotel will foot the bill themselves. The cost will be 2000/2500 euro for the 14 days.

Id make it 10k.

Happydays2020

BringBackMick wrote: »

There is a sunset clause on the legislation, it will be done away with by 7 June unless they renew it.

I would not be surprised if extended to 7 September. The fear of variants will be used to keep Irish people from travelling on holidays.

is_that_so

Happydays2020 wrote: »

I would not be surprised if extended to 7 September. The fear of variants will be used to keep Irish people from travelling on holidays.

It needs to be short term. If the Greeks do open as promised, most of the rest of the Mediterranean will follow and people will book holidays. It's no great issue locking up single random individuals but if the Murphy clan returning from Spain get two weeks that's a PR nightmare. On top of that if there are too many of them to lock up the system will collapse.

Del Griffith

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you're missing the point, which is not that we need to be scared forever.

I have not missed the point that the poster I was replying to made, which was that we should continue to restrict and quarantine for fear of new unknown strains.

You have replied to a different tangent, about herd immunity from vaccinations stopping mutations.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The point is that the protection conferred by vaccination is collective as much, or more than, individual. Once you're vaccinated you'll have a fair degree of protection, but you'll have much better protection once a critical mass of the population is vaccinated. As long as there are significant reservoirs of infection and transmission within the population, the conditions for mutation and new variants exist, and therefore new variants will emerge against which your vaccination may not protect you (or, it follows, anyone who comes in contact with you, should you be so unfortunate as to contract a new variant).

Hence a focus on vaccine passports and relaxing restrictions for vaccinated individuals is misplaced, and possibly dangerous. Until the vaccine program is largely complete, everyone - vaccinated or not - still needs to be very careful, and a fair degree of precaution will likely still be needed.

Conversely, once the vaccination program has reached the bulk of the population, then even the unvaccinated will enjoy a good degree of protection. So this is definitely not a case of "we need to be scared for ever"; more a casee of "we need to think realistically about when we can stop taking precautions, and not default to simplistic assumptions or wishful thinking".

Fair point if the current batch of vaccines decreased contagion but they were not designed to do that nor have they been through any trials to even test their efficiency at decreasing contagion. Some rough early data from Israel is positive in that regard but that's all we have to go on.

So as far as I know is not the plan, maybe I'm wrong but I've never heard (outside of your post) that the vaccine roll out will now be repurposed to stop spread.

It's also worth noting, again, that this is a relatively mild virus for over 95% of the population. This is not the measles, mumps, rubella or ebola.

It negatively impacts a sub section of a sub section of society and keeping the entire world population restricted (or in quarantine prison) once those people are vaccinated is a cracking a nut with a sledge hammer imo.

It's absurd to continue to do this with all of its huge costs and detriments just for a case "what if.."

Irish Aris

Happydays2020 wrote: »

I would not be surprised if extended to 7 September. The fear of variants will be used to keep Irish people from travelling on holidays.

is_that_so wrote: »

It needs to be short term. If the Greeks do open as promised, most of the rest of the Mediterranean will follow and people will book holidays. It's no great issue locking up single random individuals but if the Murphy clan returning from Spain get two weeks that's a PR nightmare. On top of that if there are too many of them to lock up the system will collapse.

Even if it is extended though, how likely is it that the list will contain many EU countries where people would want to go on holidays (like the Mediterranean countries)? The whole list for me is the Government going for the low hanging fruit - Austria was unlucky to get caught while they had an outbreak of the South African variant (if i'm not mistaken) and I expect that once this is under control they will be removed from the list. Many of the other countries in the list wouldn't normally have heavy traffic in/out of Ireland (UAE and Brazil maybe, but not any other)

If anything I reckon that they will continue discouraging people on travelling with the non-essential law and fines. Also thinking that most people usually go on holidays in July and August, the governement will hope that the pharma supply chain will have provided enough vaccines to mitigate the risk. And then obviously it will be the decisions of other countries: I am from Greece and from the little following of governement messaging I have seen the idea is that if you have been vaccinated or have a negative pcr you won't have to face any additional restrictions (like quarantine) other than whatever applies at the time in general.

is_that_so

Irish Aris wrote: »

Even if it is extended though, how likely is it that the list will contain many EU countries where people would want to go on holidays (like the Mediterranean countries)? The whole list for me is the Government going for the low hanging fruit - Austria was unlucky to get caught while they had an outbreak of the South African variant (if i'm not mistaken) and I expect that once this is under control they will be removed from the list. Many of the other countries in the list wouldn't normally have heavy traffic in/out of Ireland (UAE and Brazil maybe, but not any other)

If anything I reckon that they will continue discouraging people on travelling with the non-essential law and fines. Also thinking that most people usually go on holidays in July and August, the governement will hope that the pharma supply chain will have provided enough vaccines to mitigate the risk. And then obviously it will be the decisions of other countries: I am from Greece and from the little following of governement messaging I have seen the idea is that if you have been vaccinated or have a negative pcr you won't have to face any additional restrictions (like quarantine) other than whatever applies at the time in general.

Discouraging people will continue, as it should, but according to the legislation mentioned in this post, if you don't have a negative PCR test coming from other countries you still have to go to a facility anyway to be cleared, escorted by the military of course. Images of dystopia all round!

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116521085&postcount=35

Peregrinus

Del Griffith wrote: »

I have not missed the point that the poster I was replying to made, which was that we should continue to restrict and quarantine for fear of new unknown strains.

You have replied to a different tangent, about herd immunity from vaccinations stopping mutations.

Fair point.

Del Griffith wrote: »

It's also worth noting, again, that this is a relatively mild virus for over 95% of the population. This is not the measles, mumps, rubella or ebola.

It negatively impacts a sub section of a sub section of society and keeping the entire world population restricted (or in quarantine prison) once those people are vaccinated is a cracking a nut with a sledge hammer imo.

And yet it lead to vastly more deaths than measles, mumps, rubella or ebola. If it's so much milder than them, how are we to explain this?

The factor you're omitting is that, though it's milder than them for most peoople, it's vastly, vastly more contagious than them, so any outbreak is much, much bigger, and this more than offsets the relative mildness of the disease for most people who get it. The result is a very high death rate. These are real deahts, and not something we can dismiss as a nut that we are cracking with a sledgehammer.

Del Griffith

Peregrinus wrote: »

Fair point.


And yet it lead to vastly more deaths than measles, mumps, rubella or ebola. If it's so much milder than them, how are we to explain this?

The factor you're omitting is that, though it's milder than them for most peoople, it's vastly, vastly more contagious than them, so any outbreak is much, much bigger, and this more than offsets the relative mildness of the disease for most people who get it. The result is a very high death rate. These are real deahts, and not something we can dismiss as a nut that we are cracking with a sledgehammer.

Well two things - 1 is that we already have herd immunity to 3 of those 4 via MMR vaccinations, and then 2) yes agreed Covid19 is very contagious, however, it is only deadly or adversely impactful to, as I mentioned, a tiny subset of a subset.
My point really is that once that subset are vaccinated, Covid19 becomes no real threat at all and it's contagious nature is no longer something worth the extreme and radical measures that are in place.

davetherave

is_that_so wrote: »

Discouraging people will continue, as it should, but according to the legislation mentioned in this post, if you don't have a negative PCR test coming from other countries you still have to go to a facility anyway to be cleared, escorted by the military of course. Images of dystopia all round!

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116521085&postcount=35

Who is being escorted by the Defence Forces? There is nothing in my post you have linked to about the DF playing security guards, and the only reference to them in the Act is that A member of the Defence Forces entering the State in the course of his or her duties is an exempted traveller.

There is a whole section 38(H), about Service agreements for conveying and returning persons to designated facilities with no specifics about what agency, sector, or company will be doing anything. I think the images of a dystopia should stay in your head.

is_that_so

davetherave wrote: »

Who is being escorted by the Defence Forces? There is nothing in my post you have linked to about the DF playing security guards, and the only reference to them in the Act is that A member of the Defence Forces entering the State in the course of his or her duties is an exempted traveller.

There is a whole section 38(H), about Service agreements for conveying and returning persons to designated facilities with no specifics about what agency, sector, or company will be doing anything.

No, it's not there but it has been widely publicised they will be involved.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't get the anger here.

Well what about equality before the law for starters? Why should people who are uninfected be imprisoned in a facility on pain of jail while people who are infected and contagious are not subject to the same restrictions, not to mention costs?

A terrible precedent is being set here in the name of the common good, which future governments - particularly those of a resentful, authoritarian, collectivist mindset, should they come to power - may adapt across multiple domains of public policy.

Atlantic Dawn

I can see the tax payer having to bankroll thousands of these stays in full for people arriving with zero cash to their name. Airlines should be fined if they allow anyone board from an at risk country that doesn't have proof of €2k in funds.

faceman

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I can see the tax payer having to bankroll thousands of these stays in full for people arriving with zero cash to their name. Airlines should be fined if they allow anyone board from an at risk country that doesn't have proof of €2k in funds.

:rolleyes:

monkeybutter

how is this working in say OZ? i mean if you turn with zero money there you get sent back I would assume you need to make preparations for this before you travel

monkeybutter

faceman wrote: »

:rolleyes:

can you change the thread title to Detention Centers or ahem those camps term you really want to use :eek:

Irish Aris

monkeybutter wrote: »

how is this working in say OZ? i mean if you turn with zero money there you get sent back I would assume you need to make preparations for this before you travel

My understanding is that in Ireland you have to pre-book it - not sure though if it means you will have to pay in advance i.e. when you book.
And I haven't heard anything on how it will work if someone arrives and doesn't have a quarantine room pre-booked. I guess we will know as soon as the system is up and running but could they refuse entry for returning citizens/residents, if they have a permanent residence? I wouldn't think so.

Del Griffith

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I can see the tax payer having to bankroll thousands of these stays in full for people arriving with zero cash to their name.

Hopefully.

Whoever supports these radical ideas should have to bare the brunt of the bad policy they demanded.

fly_agaric

Peregrinus wrote: »

And yet it lead to vastly more deaths than measles, mumps, rubella or ebola. If it's so much milder than them, how are we to explain this?

The "it's just the flu bro" argument never dies.

What's "absurd" is that the relatively unrestricted global travel for price of a cheap (for a rich spoiled western country citizen anyway) plane ticket we'd gotten used to in the last 2 decades has become some sort of UN human right.

Governments taking it away & putting restrictions on it during an emergency leads to tantrums and hyperbolic rants about civil liberties from a subset of a subset.

faceman

fly_agaric wrote: »

The "it's just the flu bro" argument never dies.

What's "absurd" is that the relatively unrestricted global travel for price of a cheap (for a rich spoiled western country citizen anyway) plane ticket we'd gotten used to in the last 2 decades has become some sort of UN human right.

Governments taking it away & putting restrictions on it during an emergency leads to tantrums and hyperbolic rants about civil liberties from a subset of a subset.

Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) guarantees EU citizens the right to free movement within the EU. So yes, it is a right. (Albeit a little justifiably curtailed during a pandemic)

We used to send children up chimneys to clean them 2 decades ago but we don’t do that anymore. Should we reintroduce it to remind people they shouldn’t be happy with their modern day rights and privileges?

fly_agaric

faceman wrote: »

Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) guarantees EU citizens the right to free movement within the EU. So yes, it is a right. (Albeit a little justifiably curtailed during a pandemic)

We used to send children up chimneys to clean them 2 decades ago but we don’t do that anymore. Should we reintroduce it to remind people they shouldn’t be happy with their modern day rights and privileges?

You just posted to compare bringing back child labour to introducing restrictions on EU freedom of movement during a pandemic.
Thank you for making my point for me.
It is a definitely a privilege (of money & having the right passport) to travel globally although I admit it is closer to a right between ourselves & UK and between countries in the EU.

When vaccines are widely available + Covid-19 has faded away to really being "just a flu bro" (I think I've read that is what is likely to happen in the end) will be the time to be worried if democratic governments try and hang onto powers they've used + restrictions brought in during the pandemic.

edit: did we really "send children up chimneys" a mere two decades ago in Ireland? The late 90s & early 2000s must have been worse than I remember anyway but it is a bit blurry now!

Del Griffith

faceman wrote: »

Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) guarantees EU citizens the right to free movement within the EU. So yes, it is a right. (Albeit a little justifiably curtailed during a pandemic)

We used to send children up chimneys to clean them 2 decades ago but we don’t do that anymore. Should we reintroduce it to remind people they shouldn’t be happy with their modern day rights and privileges?

Of course we should, they're "spoilt westerners"!!

Del Griffith

Meanwhile, in Kiev..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/coronavirus/video-2141284/Video-Hundreds-tourists-smash-airport-refusing-quarantine.html

faceman

fly_agaric wrote: »

You just posted to compare bringing back child labour to introducing restrictions on EU freedom of movement during a pandemic.
Thank you for making my point for me.
It is a definitely a privilege (of money & having the right passport) to travel globally although I admit it is closer to a right between ourselves & UK and between countries in the EU.

When vaccines are widely available + Covid-19 has faded away to really being "just a flu bro" (I think I've read that is what is likely to happen in the end) will be the time to be worried if democratic governments try and hang onto powers they've used + restrictions brought in during the pandemic.

edit: did we really "send children up chimneys" a mere two decades ago in Ireland? The late 90s & early 2000s must have been worse than I remember anyway but it is a bit blurry now!

Some of my post was tongue in cheek but my point was that we shouldn’t use “why in my day” type arguments to justify hardships nowadays.

Red Silurian

faceman wrote: »

Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) guarantees EU citizens the right to free movement within the EU. So yes, it is a right. (Albeit a little justifiably curtailed during a pandemic)

We used to send children up chimneys to clean them 2 decades ago but we don’t do that anymore. Should we reintroduce it to remind people they shouldn’t be happy with their modern day rights and privileges?

So how is the 5km rule pregame enforceable? Under EU law it should also allow freedom of movement within Ireland, no?

Peregrinus

monkeybutter wrote: »

how is this working in say OZ? i mean if you turn with zero money there you get sent back I would assume you need to make preparations for this before you travel

In OZ it works like this:

State governments contract with hotels to provide quarantine places, and they pay the hotels.

Arriving passengers (unless they have a quarantine exemption) are transported directly to a quarantine hotel. They do not get to choose which hotel they will stay in. The number of inbound seats arriving in Australia is controlled to ensure that the number of arriving passengers does not exceed the available quarantine places.

State governments invoice passengers for the cost of quarantine. The cost invoiced is a flat cost, regardless of which hotel you are sent to, and regardless of how much the state paid that hotel. The state government enforces the invoices by the usual methods, up to and including getting court judgments, sending out debt collectors, chasing bank accounts and other assets, etc. In cases of hardship they'll talk to you about payment plans, etc. If you're genuinely penniless they can't recover from you, but not many genuinely penniless people can afford the cost of a flight to Australia these days. Many people come to Australia as "essential workers"; in those cases their quarantine fees may be paid by their employer.

The cost of quarantine includes standard meals provided in your room by the hotel. If you want more you can order it from the hotel, or you can have take-away-delivered; you pay for this yourself.

The cost of quarantine in New South Wales is $3,000 for the first adult; $1,000 for each additional adult; $500 for each child over 3; children under 3 are free. Other states are similar.

jumpinsheep

BringBackMick wrote:

There is a sunset clause on the legislation, it will be done away with by 7 June unless they renew it.

Happydays2020 wrote:

I would not be surprised if extended to 7 September. The fear of variants will be used to keep Irish people from travelling on holidays.

I'd like to monitor this legislation clause detail to see if it'll be extended, and if so, until when.
Would much appreciate if someone could please point me to the relevant website or document.
Many thanks

Red Silurian

monkeybutter wrote: »

how is this working in say OZ? i mean if you turn with zero money there you get sent back I would assume you need to make preparations for this before you travel

Not sure about OZ but in NZ you can't get on your plane at your departure airport unless you've pre-booked your hotel quarantine. Airlines have to forward the details for all passengers before take-off or else they can't land. It is technically possible to book your quarantine online at the departure gate if there is no waiting list

mandrake04

monkeybutter wrote: »

how is this working in say OZ? i mean if you turn with zero money there you get sent back I would assume you need to make preparations for this before you travel

You wont get sent back, it becomes a state debt.


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116062230&postcount=1909