Will you travel? [Mod Note in Post #1 - Travel Discussion Only! Megathread]

Micky 32

Gael23 wrote: »

Is hoping to travel in September/October realistic?

No even if you’re vaccinated , just incase you bring back a new strain :rolleyes:

mulbot

Mr.S wrote: »

There's a checkpoint on approach to Terminal 2 and 1, where you'll be asked the reason for traveling, and where you've come from.

I would imagine people blatantly flaunting the restrictions will be fined. I guess it's more complicated when you say you are going for X essential reason, as not sure how you can prove that.

Does this happen if you're on the airport bus from the blue or red car parks?

Donald Trump

bladespin wrote: »

I'd be a lot happier about the Lanzarote numbers than the UK's tbh - that said scapegoating travel while community spread is the main driver is just a diversionary tactic IMO.

If we're restricted then the restriction should apply to all, no waffle, if it doesn't then it shouldn't apply to us either, it's a bit disingenuous pointing out holiday makers when certain 'so called' essential travellers are being shipped in without restriction or test.

Again that is pure deflection - "Hey, look over there".


We're talking here about principles. Are you in favour of the concept of travel restrictions or are you not? It is quite a simple question. You are entitled to say there should not be any restrictions for any activity if you want. I won't agree with you but you can say it if that is what you think. I think that there should be no non-essential travel. If you sit in the middle and say that there should be restrictions, but that people should be allowed to just decide to break them if they want with no repercussions then it is difficult to actually pin that down. People who post things like that appear to me to just not actually have a clue.



Nobody is scapegoating travel - they are just highlighting one component. If some is caught breaking restrictions to go 80km for a burger then it is no harm to publish that to remind people that they can be caught. If someone breaks restrictions because the highlight of their ambition is a trip to Lanzarote regardless of restrictions, then there is also no harm to publish to remind them that they can be caught.

mel123

dartboardio wrote: »

It's the governments fault people are losing out on money, not the airlines IMO

It's the governments fault, for not having any rules in place, just advice.

So how can the airlines be expected to hand out refunds, for mere advice.. where as if the government had a clear actual BAN , not advice, for anyone looking to travel non essential, then I'm sure the airlines would be handing out refunds no problem.

At the moment, there is a 5k restriction, so unless you live within this radius of the airport, you are breaking the law to travel there. I agree with you on this though, and i think travel is being made some kind of scape goat. I have family who went to Lanzarote for Christmas and contrary to what everyone thinks it was pretty dead over there. Most places are not open. One hotel they were in closed half way through their stay because it just wasnt sustainable to keep it open, next hotel they went to they were nearly the only people in it. People who think these places are 'normal' are really mistaken, its far from normal.

Ray Donovan

faceman wrote: »

I’d say the checkpoints will continue for some time. Ireland will at best move to level 4 in March which is still a defacto lockdown. No reason to remove checkpoints. What will be more interesting is will they last beyond Easter

Incidentally Pascal Donohue said the government expects the new travel rules to have a big impact. Already the noise is deterrent enough so I imagine the focus will shift away soon enough

The Iceland model will probably be the model the government settles on. Everyone does 2 tests, one on arrival and one 5 days later with quarantine inbetween. Quarantine can be done at home but you register your accommodation. (You are allowed to exercise with their quarantine outdoors). The state covers the costs. It applies to all travellers

Do you mean the state covers the cost of the 2 PCR tests?

Ray Donovan

faceman wrote: »

I think people need to drop the whole "Lanzarote" angle. In reality, tourism numbers are rock bottom there. According to local sources most people visiting are longer term visitors or have property there. Lanzarote also has curfew, social and hospitality restrictions. Their PCR requirement is strict, and has been in place for longer than most countries. Even people travelling from parts of Spain are subject to PCR testing. They have had detention centres for months (quarantine hotels) for people who dont have a test or fail a test

The case numbers are alot lower than Ireland too. Looking at the PT footage, most people seemed older generation, hardly the type to be socialising the same way younger generations might.

The spotlight should probably spin to holiday destinations where hospitality is open and case rates. Im not overly familiar with the M.E. anymore but it sounds like Dubai could be one of those places.

Im fairly confident, anecdotally of course, that short term tourism has ground to a halt across most of the EU. I suspect many of the travellers returning to Ireland this month probably left before there was a hint of a major crisis or in December when rules were lax.

Looking at my area in Spain, the beaches are empty and with hospitality and golf courses closed, I cant see anyone getting horny for a visit anytime soon. I suspect with the introduction of the dark red zone in the EU, Spain will probably curtail Irish holidaymakers if Ireland remains in the dark red category, as will most other countries.

What is the Dark Red Zone?

dartboardio

Mr.S wrote: »

There's a checkpoint on approach to Terminal 2 and 1, where you'll be asked the reason for traveling, and where you've come from.

I would imagine people blatantly flaunting the restrictions will be fined. I guess it's more complicated when you say you are going for X essential reason, as not sure how you can prove that.

Checkpoints as people drive into the airport, or Gardai standing around stopping people walking by?

Plumbthedepths

Donald Trump wrote: »

Again that is pure deflection - "Hey, look over there".


We're talking here about principles. Are you in favour of the concept of travel restrictions or are you not? It is quite a simple question. You are entitled to say there should not be any restrictions for any activity if you want. I won't agree with you but you can say it if that is what you think. I think that there should be no non-essential travel. If you sit in the middle and say that there should be restrictions, but that people should be allowed to just decide to break them if they want with no repercussions then it is difficult to actually pin that down. People who post things like that appear to me to just not actually have a clue.



Nobody is scapegoating travel - they are just highlighting one component. If some is caught breaking restrictions to go 80km for a burger then it is no harm to publish that to remind people that they can be caught. If someone breaks restrictions because the highlight of their ambition is a trip to Lanzarote regardless of restrictions, then there is also no harm to publish to remind them that they can be caught.

Just on the burger thing, if you believe a car full of lads headed 80 k to buy a burger I would like to interest you in some magic beans for a very affordable price.

Donald Trump

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Just on the burger thing, if you believe a car full of lads headed 80 k to buy a burger I would like to interest you in some magic beans for a very affordable price.

That is obviously the excuse they gave. Do you think that they shouldn't have published the story just because it's obviously a load of shite?

Donald Trump

Nearly 10% of arrivals from Brazil who turned up for tests tested positive

https://www.independent.ie/news/nearly-one-in-ten-passengers-tested-for-covid-19-after-arriving-from-brazil-have-been-given-positive-results-40019947.html

RobitTV

Question: What's this Icelandic model they are now talking about? Can you isolate at home for the 5 days? Who is paying for the second mandatory test?

faceman

RobitTV wrote: »

Question: What's this Icelandic model they are now talking about? Can you isolate at home for the 5 days? Who is paying for the second mandatory test?

The Iceland model is a more formal version of what we have here.

Test on arrival
Quarantine at home or at designated accommodation which can be selected by the guest from a pre defined approved list of accommodation offerings
Test on day 5

Assuming both tests negative you’re free

State covers cost of tests

The rules around quarantine are more sensical. You can do exercise outdoors. (Alone obviously.)

RobitTV

faceman wrote: »

The Iceland model is a more formal version of what we have here.

Test on arrival
Quarantine at home or at designated accommodation which can be selected by the guest from a pre defined approved list of accommodation offerings
Test on day 5

Assuming both tests negative you’re free

State covers cost of tests

The rules around quarantine are more sensical. You can do exercise outdoors. (Alone obviously.)

I must say this plan sounds very promising and it's something that can work very well. If the government go down this route I think this will keep many people on both sides of the travel debate content.

This will mean you will no longer need a 72 hour PCR test arriving home to Ireland, is this correct? - this would save so much money and hassle alone.

Donald Trump

State should not be covering the costs of tests necessitated by discretionary travel.

People should have to pay. They can put in a procedure for an appeal for the 1-in-100 who are on genuine emergency travel.

If a person has to travel for their work, let their employer pay the expense.

JP Liz V1

https://twitter.com/PatONei37340674/status/1354830468013764612

Flights still going out from Ireland, is this travel deemed essential? How are folks getting through checkpoints to airports even?

josip

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

... How are folks getting through checkpoints to airports even?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvjorMEnuUI&t=2m15s

RobitTV

https://twitter.com/robertburke84/status/1354347657544785920

johnire

That’s great information- I wonder who pays for the accommodation?

faceman wrote: »

The Iceland model is a more formal version of what we have here.

Test on arrival
Quarantine at home or at designated accommodation which can be selected by the guest from a pre defined approved list of accommodation offerings
Test on day 5

Assuming both tests negative you’re free

State covers cost of tests

The rules around quarantine are more sensical. You can do exercise outdoors. (Alone obviously.)

Donald Trump

RobitTV wrote: »

https://twitter.com/robertburke84/status/1354347657544785920

It would be nice to have a bit of consistency though there no?


I think both should be publicised and outed. Some seem to think that the RTE one should be highlighted (which it was) but that people off on their non-essential holliers should be given a pass.

faceman

johnire wrote: »

That’s great information- I wonder who pays for the accommodation?

It’s home quarantine for the locals and the tourist pays for their own accommodation. There’s a list of approved accommodations on the Icelandic website. You’re not just thrown in any old hotel

caveat emptor

RobitTV wrote: »

https://twitter.com/robertburke84/status/1354347657544785920

Yeah, the whole RTE had party thing is the same argument as bobby story had a funeral think lobbed at shin fein. Not allowed to mention the tragic Garda funeral around the same time though. Loads of people haven't followed rules in parties or funerals this past year.

Pointing fingers does fvck all to change the situation. Kids in ballymun being blamed now for not socially distancing .All these things don't help but staying on track is important to get it down low.

bladespin

Donald Trump wrote: »

Again that is pure deflection - "Hey, look over there".


We're talking here about principles. Are you in favour of the concept of travel restrictions or are you not? It is quite a simple question. You are entitled to say there should not be any restrictions for any activity if you want. I won't agree with you but you can say it if that is what you think. I think that there should be no non-essential travel. If you sit in the middle and say that there should be restrictions, but that people should be allowed to just decide to break them if they want with no repercussions then it is difficult to actually pin that down. People who post things like that appear to me to just not actually have a clue.

Think you’re missing the point, I’m neutral, I travel internally all the time regardless for work (I’ve halted international work due to issues it could cause with my customer base hereI’m doing my bit, I don’t have any real opinion on travel pro or con, my point is: if we have rules about travel abroad then they should apply to all, quarantine etc if we ban it then fine (don’t see how it’s possible though), it’s a cop out pointing out travellers from Lanzarote when we’re flying in workers from Brazil etc without proper testing, quarantine etc. It’s also shockingly easy to get dispensation re ‘essential’ work.

RobitTV

RobitTV wrote: »

It's pretty likely there won't be checkpoints at the airport when Level 5 comes to an end and lockdown is over. The more they remove the restrictions over the coming months, the more it's going to be harder to enforce anything. Once 5km comes to an end, then the game will change.

Level 5 restrictions have a lot of 'legal backing' - once you move down the levels, the legal side mostly turns into recommendations by the Gardai.

There could well be checkpoints for another while. But when Easter is over and has passed. I think its increasingly unlikely.

As I have already explained to you, the 5KM limit is ONLY FOR EXERCISE.

If you are not exercising then you cannot travel ANY distance unless its a necessary journey for an essential reason

Donald Trump

bladespin wrote: »

Think you’re missing the point, I’m neutral, I travel internally all the time regardless for work (I’ve halted international work due to issues it could cause with my customer base hereI’m doing my bit, I don’t have any real opinion on travel pro or con, my point is: if we have rules about travel abroad then they should apply to all, quarantine etc if we ban it then fine (don’t see how it’s possible though), it’s a cop out pointing out travellers from Lanzarote when we’re flying in workers from Brazil etc without proper testing, quarantine etc. It’s also shockingly easy to get dispensation re ‘essential’ work.

The Lanzarote thing is low hanging fruit. It's obvious. You have to get those taken care of before you move onto going through apparently legitimate excuses to check that that they in fact true.



I also think that there should be strict rules. There was an article though that there was 800 arrivals and 350 from holiday destinations or whatever. So there isn't a huge amount of inward travel. If 100 people land off a plane from Lanzarote, they wouldn't be an insignificant part of the arrivals for that day. So I think they are fair game to be outed in the media. Same as I think the RTE presenter shindig was right to be outed in the media. As was golf-gate.


I don't understand the people who seem to agree with the concept that there needs to be restrictions (i.e. they are not complete covid deniers) but don't want there to be even a threat of any consequences for someone arbitrarily breaking them because they feel like it.



And yes, not all 350 might have been coming back from a holiday. but not all of the remaining 550 (or whatever) wouldn't have been either.

RobitTV

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

As I have already explained to you, the 5KM limit is ONLY FOR EXERCISE.

If you are not exercising then you cannot travel ANY distance unless its a necessary journey for an essential reason

I'm not sure if you have misunderstood me. I'm talking about when they remove the 5km limit. I know that the 5km limit is only for exercise and non-essential journeys aren't possible. This is why I am talking about when they remove the 5km limit in the months ahead and people can travel further in the country or on a county level basis. I think you may have misunderstood me, I'm not talking about the here and now situation. Because it's well known the 5km limit means non-essential journeys aren't possible.

It's not possible to travel outside the 5km for non-essential journeys and this is well known. I'm talking about the removal of this limit in the future.

JP Liz V1

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1354885737880178688

RobitTV

We know that already. Let's see if people actually get caught and get fined.

RobitTV

RobitTV wrote: »

I'm not sure if you have misunderstood me. I'm talking about when they remove the 5km limit. I know that the 5km limit is only for exercise and non-essential journeys aren't possible. This is why I am talking about when they remove the 5km limit in the months ahead and people can travel further in the country or on a county level basis. I think you may have misunderstood me, I'm not talking about the here and now situation. Because it's well known the 5km limit means non-essential journeys aren't possible.

It's not possible to travel outside the 5km for non-essential journeys and this is well known. I'm talking about the removal of this limit in the future.

It's not possible to travel AT ALL for non essential journeys.

There's no 5km limit for travel. It's only for exercise. That's it, nothing else. It doesn't apply outside of that one activity.

You are totally confused by this. You cannot travel 4.9km from home in your car for no reason. You can travel 4.9km for the purpose of exercising that remaining 100 metres.

If you get in your car and travel even 1km for ****s and giggles, that's an offence. You are a damn fool to admit it but that's a separate issue.

So they need to remove the complete ban on non essential travel, noting to do with 5km

Scoondal

RobitTV wrote: »

Question: What's this Icelandic model they are now talking about? Can you isolate at home for the 5 days? Who is paying for the second mandatory test?

Maybe it's the Iceland model of jailing banking executives who damaged their economy. But I doubt it.

JP Liz V1

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1354885737880178688

Twitter, second only to the journal for uninformed and incorrect information