Coronavirus outbreak

[Oldhippy]

There are clearly some important exceptions, but again with the amount of tech around these days are these a must? Red Cross and medical teams of all nations are an obvious exception. Just going a regular holiday, skiers for example is that worth your life potentially?

 

[Ajax Bay]

Any travel carries some risk of this now IMO.

Apart from cycling; obv. No risk of being stopped from cycling home.

 

[CanucksTraveller]

Who goes on 'holiday' then moans about what happened. Only an idiot would travel internationally - you do it, you expect the risk of being stranded. It's been like that for nearly a year now.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...esidents-trapped-overseas-by-quarantine-rules

I love the clever workaround plan that Maria (stuck in Portugal) has hatched...

"Now, she is considering flying back via a third country if rules allow"

Well even a cursory glance at the rules tells you that if you've been in a red list country, you have to declare that and enter the isolation programme. And to lie about that to circumvent quarantine carries a ten grand fine, or ten year stretch at HM's pleasure.

I half expect to see Maria bleating in the papers soon that she "didn't know" she would be fined 10 grand for merely telling the tiniest of white lies.

 

[mjr]

I love the clever workaround plan that Maria (stuck in Portugal) has hatched...

Well even a cursory glance at the rules tells you that if you've been in a red list country, you have to declare that and enter the isolation programme. And to lie about that to circumvent quarantine carries a ten grand fine, or ten year stretch at HM's pleasure.

I read that as to get around the lack of flights, not the quarantine requirement, as in this section from the article:

"I have pre-settled status, but the flights keep being cancelled.” Now, she is considering flying back via a third country if rules allow, but is concerned about the cost of a hotel quarantine should that be necessary.

 

[mjr]

Apart from cycling; obv. No risk of being stopped from cycling home.

Really? Have all border/zone closures been allowing cyclists through?

 

[Ajax Bay]

Do you empathise with the plight the subjects of the article have unexpectedly found themselves in, @mjr ? (I don't btw. Motive for each Maria was given as 'visiting family'. I'd like to, too.)

 

[matticus]

Do you empathise with the plight the subjects of the article have unexpectedly found themselves in, @mjr ? (I don't btw. Motive for each Maria was given as 'visiting family'. I'd like to, too.)

That's a tricky one to answer ... but one of the Marias does make a good point:
‘Travel is almost a privilege now: you have to be rich enough to pay for quarantine’

You can still be rich and feckless, and fly around without huge inconvenience from the pandemic.

 

[CanucksTraveller]

You can still be rich and feckless, and fly around without huge inconvenience from the pandemic.

Up to a point... yes you may be able to afford the 2 week hotel stay coming from a red list country, but you're still going to have to do it. 2 weeks in a hotel room is a pretty unpleasant and huge inconvenience I'd say. You'll be dismantling your Corby trouser press by day two. (And you can't even visit Michael in the BP garage).

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

Up to a point... yes you may be able to afford the 2 week hotel stay coming from a red list country, but you're still going to have to do it. 2 weeks in a hotel room is a pretty unpleasant and huge inconvenience I'd say. You'll be dismantling your Corby trouser press by day two. (And you can't even visit Michael in the BP garage).

Ten years in prison or 10 days in a Travelodge. That's a toughie.

 

[MrGrumpy]

We did an overnight stay in the Travelodge in Doncaster about 4yrs ago, the room did remind my boys of what prison may look like

 

[Ajax Bay]

Think 14 days in a hotel room is a pretty huge inconvenience for most, rich or not @matticus
The main problem is that, when deciding to travel or not, people will have built in /accepted the high risk that they be required by law to self-isolate for 14 days/ 10 days on return from overseas, and, if sensible recognised the risk of flight delays and associated expenditure. But that non-enforceable non quarantine has now been superseded (if it happens) with proper quarantining, at the traveller's considerable (and unanticipated) expense.
It's in the national interest that the amount of the B.1.351 variant be minimised in UK. 'We' are trying to clamp down on it in the known areas where there is still limited circulation. And 'we' want to avoid re-seeding it elsewhere by travellers returning to UK and then spreading into the community. Some of those are bound to be asymptomatic carriers and the adherence to q-self-isolation has been low (these are the cohort who've chosen to travel abroad in a pandemic, remember). I'd prefer this not to be yet another bill picked up by the exchequer. If that makes travel at present (UK and many other countries "locked down" more expensive overall; fine by me. I note it's also/separately proposed that the purpose of outgoing travel will need to declared and 'checked' before being allowed to fly.
The full list of countries which will have to stay at a quarantine hotel are:

• Angola
• Argentina
• Bolivia
• Botswana
• Burundi
• Brazil
• Cape Verde
• Chile
• Colombia
• Democratic Republic of Congo
• Ecuador
• Eswatini
• French Guiana
• Guyana
• Lesotho
• Malawi
• Mauritius
• Mozambique
• Namibia
• Panama
• Paraguay
• Peru
• Portugal (including Madeira and the Azores)
• Rwanda
• Seychelles
• South Africa
• Suriname
• Tanzania
• UAE
• Uruguay
• Venezuela
• Zambia
• Zimbabwe

 

[mjr]

Do you empathise with the plight the subjects of the article have unexpectedly found themselves in, @mjr ? (I don't btw. Motive for each Maria was given as 'visiting family'. I'd like to, too.)

Well, I've not seen most of my family for 18+ months except for video calls, but I do sympathise a little with those visiting family. There but for the Graces, and so on: it is not difficult to see that one of my generation of our family might want to visit one of the older generation (many of whom now live alone) and help out for a while if they have problems. Can anyone not see themselves ever being or ever having been possible to end up in a similar situation? Should people should abandon relatives to the care of their local state services rather than travel to help?

My relatives are all currently in this country (AFAIK), but that is not true for some of the in-laws of my generation... and unlike some on here, I don't see national boundaries as especially difficult for viruses to cross.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I can relate to the two Marias' motive (visiting family). Nearly everyone with family is in the same boat. But I can't sympathise with their plight: it could be qualitatively foreseen, or at least it could be foreseen that they might have to stay put and visit their family for longer (and that's hopefully a bonus for each of the Marias). The dislocation of expectation is the requirement to pay serious money for hotel quarantine food and accommodation.

 

[matticus]

I can relate to the two Marias' motive (visiting family). Nearly everyone with family is in the same boat. But I can't sympathise with their plight: it could be qualitatively foreseen, or at least it could be foreseen that they might have to stay put and visit their family for longer (and that's hopefully a bonus for each of the Marias). The dislocation of expectation is the requirement to pay serious money for hotel quarantine food and accommodation.

So how come you don't see how wealth may mitigate this?

 

[Ajax Bay]

I can see how having 'wealth' could mitigate the above. Are you ascribing to me the opposite view from my comments above? But I'm afraid it doesn't impact my 'Clapham omnibus' sympathy level.
Those who can 'afford' the financial risk of being forced to pay to quarantine in a hotel for 14 days can minimise that disadvantage.
But incarceration in an airport hotel is still a massive inconvenience, money or no money. I hope those in that position realise that it's for the good of the wider community when feeling sorry for themselves.
Leaving UK to travel abroad, and back "is almost a privilege now: you have to be rich feckless enough" Maria might have said.