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

monkeybutter

monkeybutter wrote: »

Have you spent sometime inside yourself

Yes, yes I have.

monkeybutter

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Yes, yes I have.

TV licence? Worth the time

caveat emptor

faceman wrote: »

Right so, you’re considering a family bereavement a conflict of interest?

Wooo there. Absolutely not.

AFAIK funerals are essential travel and thus are allowed. With regard to quarantine that would be tough but we are not there yet if you live in Spain.

They are really trying to contain the Austrian outbreak of S.A variant. Hopefully they can.

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1359910294764609543?s=20

0lddog

Father Hernandez wrote: »

...It would mean if Johnny and Mary are in Lanzarote now and want to fly home to Ireland in 2 weeks time and this Monday, Spain/Canaries gets added to that list, Johnny and Mary have to pay €4k for a 2 week stay in mandatory hotel quarantine.

Isnt there something that if Johnny and Mary are TDs, elected local reps or journos then they wont have to ?

( science has shown that these classes of person are superior to your actual run of the mill riff-raff and would never, ever get or spread any sort of nasty bug )*


* - perhaps its more to facilitate MM's vanity aspiration to infect POTUS ( he that is in his late 70s and careful to a fault ).

0lddog

caveat emptor wrote: »

....They are really trying to contain the Austrian outbreak of S.A variant....

Austria ?

As in the country that shares border with 7 other countries ?

Joke ?

monkeybutter

monkeybutter wrote: »

TV licence? Worth the time

Not relevant. I have been inside them and seen the faculties, people and reasons they are there

Comparing a hotel that people agreed to stay in freely, to them is laughable

faceman

faceman wrote: »

You can call it a hotel all you want. But to suggest that the traveller “agrees” to stay given they have no choice of hotel or say in the matter is incredibly blinkered and short sighted. The traveller isn’t selecting a hotel on booking.com. We’re not talking about tourists here.

Prisoners are given exercise time daily. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

Prisoners are allowed visitors. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

Prisoners are allowed social time with other inmates. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t

Prisoners are allowed compassionate leave. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

International travellers who despite producing negative covid results have less freedoms than confirmed covid cases and their close contacts.

PS. Do you always mock people who have a different opinion to you?

I'm confused, aren't you the one trying to say they are the same?

And yes, they absolutely 100% have agreed too stay as part of their entry requirements. Do you oppose all entry requirements? Are we somehow 'forced' to undergo medical procedures by the Spanish authorities because they require a negative test?

I mock silliness. Your post is silly.

IQO

Father Hernandez wrote: »

Everything points to travelers of any nationality (Irish citizens included) who fly into Ireland and their origin is any country on the red list, has to stay in mandatory hotel quarantine and pay themeselves, potentially €2k.

It would mean if Johnny and Mary are in Lanzarote now and want to fly home to Ireland in 2 weeks time and this Monday, Spain/Canaries gets added to that list, Johnny and Mary have to pay €4k for a 2 week stay in mandatory hotel quarantine.

As the new hotel quarantine plan doesn't seem to be a coordinated European effort.. Johnny and Mary would be wise to fly first to another European country not on the red list, and make their way to Ireland from there.

Soon there will hardly be any direct flights to sun destinations left anyway, so it will be much harder to trace where people started their journey. I spoke to people who arrived from Brazil this week without any issues or questions asked (after transiting in Germany as there are no direct Brazil to Ireland flights).

In the meantime today:

https://twitter.com/Michaelkelly707/status/1359988168607563779

gozunda

faceman wrote: »

You can call it a hotel all you want. But to suggest that the traveller “agrees” to stay given they have no choice of hotel or say in the matter is incredibly blinkered and short sighted. The traveller isn’t selecting a hotel on booking.com. We’re not talking about tourists here.

Prisoners are given exercise time daily. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.
Prisoners are allowed visitors. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.
Prisoners are allowed social time with other inmates. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t
Prisoners are allowed compassionate leave. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.
International travellers who despite producing negative covid results have less freedoms than confirmed covid cases and their close contacts.
PS. Do you always mock people who have a different opinion to you?

Again people choose to travel.and if they do so they know they will have to quarantine.

What's the alternative - throw everything out the window and allow unfettered inward and outward travel? Or?

Serious question - do you spend the same amount of effort giving out abouts for example Spains restrictions as you do ours?

Notably you seem to be against practically every restriction that has been brought in in Ireland to help reduce the spread of infection - despite similar / stronger restrictions being introduced in many other countries. What gives?

josip

Dental charges are fairly high here in fairness.

...gardaí at the National Immigration Bureau have noticed that on some flights to sunnier climes, between 30% and 40% of people travelling have dental appointments awaiting them.

https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2021/0211/1196594-covid-19-restrictions-tenerife-essential-international-travel-dental-medical-appointments/

Del Griffith

IQO wrote: »

In the meantime today:

https://twitter.com/Michaelkelly707/status/1359988168607563779

Counting the flights in the sky.. that is some next level curtain twitching right there. Extreme twitching if you will.

Good to see done countries starting to wave in vaccinated travelers, with no restrictions. I’ll be getting a vaccine in the UK so hopefully not too long before I join that privileged group

Wallander

Yep I had root canal treatment in Poland last summer, about 20% of price in Ireland. Weather was great, pubs were open, and there was much less Covid than in Dublin.

josip wrote: »

Dental charges are fairly high here in fairness.



https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2021/0211/1196594-covid-19-restrictions-tenerife-essential-international-travel-dental-medical-appointments/

monkeybutter

Wallander wrote: »

Yep I had root canal treatment in Poland last summer, about 20% of price in Ireland. Weather was great, pubs were open, and there was much less Covid than in Dublin.

Weather was crap here, dental charges Are high, covud was basically non existent though, so you are wrong in that one

GazzaL

josip wrote: »

Dental charges are fairly high here in fairness.



https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2021/0211/1196594-covid-19-restrictions-tenerife-essential-international-travel-dental-medical-appointments/

Any recommendations for where to go for the best dentist this summer? Lanzarote, Santa Ponsa, Vilamoura, Malaga?

Micky 32

I have a feeling foreign dentists are going to start making a fortune:pac:

mmclo

poisonated wrote: »

https://www.dfa.ie/passports/

Until level 5 is lifted at least.

Seems more related to staff safety etc rather than preventing travel. Refusing to issue passports to prevent travel would certainly be illegal can't see any legislation changing that

monkeybutter

mmclo wrote: »

Straightforward court case for somebody, this is the most basic right of a citizen and a basic principle of international law

Knock yourself out maybe John and Gemma can join you in court

faceman

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I'm confused, aren't you the one trying to say they are the same?

And yes, they absolutely 100% have agreed too stay as part of their entry requirements. Do you oppose all entry requirements? Are we somehow 'forced' to undergo medical procedures by the Spanish authorities because they require a negative test?

I mock silliness. Your post is silly.

Do keep up Niner, if you are going to engage in intelligent debate. Numerous times I have already given my position on travel which includes testing and depending on the circumstances, isolation/quarantine/iceland model.

gozunda wrote: »

Again people choose to travel.and if they do so they know they will have to quarantine.

What's the alternative - throw everything out the window and allow unfettered inward and outward travel? Or?

Serious question - do you spend the same amount of effort giving out abouts for example Spains restrictions as you do ours?

Notably you seem to be against practically every restriction that has been brought in in Ireland to help reduce the spread of infection - despite similar / stronger restrictions being introduced in many other countries. What gives?

And again, I have already given my perspective on restrictions already. Just because I dont agree with your view doesn't mean I hold a polar opposite view. I am closer aligned with the Icelandic model. I support pre and post departure testing (and have since pandemic started). I support a current restriction on holiday travel where a risk is posed.

If there is bonafide scientific evidence of a need to restrict travel from countries were a variant poses a significant risk to Ireland then quarantine options should be considered but should not be considered as the permanent solution. This is a view upheld by WHO, ECDC and infectious disease experts in Ireland. I strongly believe that we should not be introducing quarantine detention centre hotels for intra EU travel unless a threat emerges. (which may be the case with Austria, as mentioned before Im not fully up on that so its unfair of me to say otherwise)

And as for complaining about Spanish restrictions, you should see my posts in the Spanish forums. Car park covid rules and wearing masks while exercising outdoors are current bug bearers.

I also abide by all rules, even when I don't like them. (In Spain and in Ireland when Im there) Even the dumb rule for mask wearing when going for a run.

faceman

faceman wrote: »

Do keep up Niner, if you are going to engage in intelligent debate. Numerous times I have already given my position on travel which includes testing and depending on the circumstances, isolation/quarantine/iceland model.

Dodgy dodgy doesnt catchy monkey. I have asked straight questions. you listed a lot of stuff that applies to detention centres and prisoners but not quarantine hotels so again, how did that prove they are the same?

How is it against human rights to set requirements for entry into the country?

By all means disagree with the requirement but when you insist on making the above claims, they require backing

faceman

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Dodgy dodgy doesnt catchy monkey. I have asked straight questions. you listed a lot of stuff that applies to detention centres and prisoners but not quarantine hotels so again, how did that prove they are the same?

How is it against human rights to set requirements for entry into the country?

By all means disagree with the requirement but when you insist on making the above claims, they require backing

Now we’re getting somewhere and you’re speaking more on point. Not sure where your human rights question is coming from but it’s one of many issues. A lot of Irish people have cited Australia as an example to follow. Quarantine has been a controversial measure in Oz with certain parts of the medical profession pushing for home quarantine alternatives

First and foremost believe it or not there is no universal guidance regarding the infrastructure for a quarantine facility. The WHO acknowledge this and offer only basic guidelines to governments. Many countries do not permit any compassionate exemptions to the quarantined. Remember, these are not confirmed carriers of covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/05/hotel-quarantine-a-disaster-and-vulnerable-people-should-be-allowed-home-doctor-says

https://www.qhrc.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/30215/2020.12.09-Media-statement-More-transparency-needed-in-hotel-quarantine-decision-making.pdf

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/windows-should-be-mandatory-in-quarantine-say-doctors/13017972

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/fresh-air-hotel-quarantine/12801290

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/coronavirus/bombshell-email-shown-at-victorias-hotel-quarantine-inquiry-reveals-brett-sutton-had-moral-and-legal-concerns/news-story/574ec2b3bf0e500db4ea589d37a0b887

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathiessen/2020/04/04/australian-travelers-complain-about-5-star-hotel-quarantine/

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/public-service-deficiencies-laid-bare-in-hotel-quarantine-inquiry-20200929-p560di.html

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/cho-defends-hotel-quarantine-amid-concerns-from-human-rights-watchdog-20201210-p56mc7.html

https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2020/8/20/human-rights-will-help-governments-make-the-right-decisions-on-quarantine

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/quarantine-must-change-to-protect-those-being-detained-20200820-p55nsu.html

Pretzill

I haven't read too much of this thread. I would be in favour of staying put and stopping movement to limit the spread and decrease the mortality rates, covid likes to move and soon we will be vaccinated against it. I do believe we may need yearly vaccinations and some parts of the world won't get them - I also think the day of cheap sir travel may be over - it's not covid that will stop holidays abroad it's economy and cost.

We may be looking at foreign holidays as a luxury we simply won't be able to afford.

faceman

faceman wrote: »

Now we’re getting somewhere and you’re speaking more on point. Not sure where your human rights question is coming from but it’s one of many issues. A lot of Irish people have cited Australia as an example to follow. Quarantine has been a controversial measure in Oz with certain parts of the medical profession pushing for home quarantine alternatives

right, your just going to dodge the questions put to you about your use of the term 'detention centre' and the list of items that actually do happen in prisons compared to hotels, its against peoples rights and how the state is forcing people against their will.

I can ask again if you would like?

faceman wrote: »

I got mocked in another thread for calling quarantine hotels “detention centres”. This article proves my point. Looking at this article how is not considered a detention centre?

https://jrnl.ie/5351608

Ignoring the fact that you used the Journal as a source dispite the fact they cant even get the basics about 5km right, why do you insist on using the term 'detention centres' instead of 'quarantine centre' even?

Heres the second part, the part where you actually showed a marked seperation between the hotels and detention centres.

faceman wrote: »

You can call it a hotel all you want. But to suggest that the traveller “agrees” to stay given they have no choice of hotel or say in the matter is incredibly blinkered and short sighted. The traveller isn’t selecting a hotel on booking.com. We’re not talking about tourists here.

Prisoners are given exercise time daily. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

Prisoners are allowed visitors. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

Prisoners are allowed social time with other inmates. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t

Prisoners are allowed compassionate leave. “Quarantine hotel guests” aren’t.

International travellers who despite producing negative covid results have less freedoms than confirmed covid cases and their close contacts.

and for the third time I will ask you in what way have people no say in this considering it will be a pre-requisite in entering the state from abroad just like any other entry requirement placed on a foreign national who wishes to enter and they are absolutely free to choose not to buy the ticket, get on the plane and voluntarily go through passport control?

They can even opt out at passport control and will be facilitated with arranging a return flight to where they originated if they so desire. As opposed to a detention centre as you mentioned above, a place where people are held against their will and did not agree or freely enter in the first place.

Do you consider the tennis players in Australia to have been detained against their will?
Do you consider requiring a negative test to be against your will and forced medical intervention?

Its no different, its a requirement of entry.

caveat emptor

faceman wrote: »

Now we’re getting somewhere and you’re speaking more on point. Not sure where your human rights question is coming from but it’s one of many issues. A lot of Irish people have cited Australia as an example to follow. Quarantine has been a controversial measure in Oz with certain parts of the medical profession pushing for home quarantine alternatives

First and foremost believe it or not there is no universal guidance regarding the infrastructure for a quarantine facility. The WHO acknowledge this and offer only basic guidelines to governments. Many countries do not permit any compassionate exemptions to the quarantined. Remember, these are not confirmed carriers of covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/05/hotel-quarantine-a-disaster-and-vulnerable-people-should-be-allowed-home-doctor-says

https://www.qhrc.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/30215/2020.12.09-Media-statement-More-transparency-needed-in-hotel-quarantine-decision-making.pdf

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/windows-should-be-mandatory-in-quarantine-say-doctors/13017972

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/fresh-air-hotel-quarantine/12801290

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/coronavirus/bombshell-email-shown-at-victorias-hotel-quarantine-inquiry-reveals-brett-sutton-had-moral-and-legal-concerns/news-story/574ec2b3bf0e500db4ea589d37a0b887

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathiessen/2020/04/04/australian-travelers-complain-about-5-star-hotel-quarantine/

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/public-service-deficiencies-laid-bare-in-hotel-quarantine-inquiry-20200929-p560di.html

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/cho-defends-hotel-quarantine-amid-concerns-from-human-rights-watchdog-20201210-p56mc7.html

https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2020/8/20/human-rights-will-help-governments-make-the-right-decisions-on-quarantine

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/quarantine-must-change-to-protect-those-being-detained-20200820-p55nsu.html

I find the whole threatening to litigious a bit silly. We have laws and constitution. Any measures will be tested as they have been through out this. (See Gemma and John's historic case or Ryanairs PR stunt). It's very telling when someone says something is illegal or quotes human rights but then doesn't relate it to the particular law or legislation that is being violated or how a measure relates to it. It's usually an unfounded threat.

Take for instance David Kenny's opinion. He is assistant professor of law at Trinity College Dublin.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/mandatory-quarantine-allowable-under-the-constitution-1.4476110


Seems to the same here. I notice anyone from government nor the attorney general have detailed any specific issues with it.

Quarantine of this sort engages serval constitutional rights. First, it is a deprivation of liberty, a right protected in Article 40.4 of the Constitution. The courts have also recognised a constitutional right to travel that would be restricted, directly or indirectly, by this measure. These are serious rights restrictions.

Crucially, however, constitutional rights are not absolute. Not every restriction on liberty or travel is unconstitutional. Restricting liberty is only unconstitutional if it is done otherwise than in accordance with law and basic constitutional principles. And rights can generally be restricted in the interests of advancing the common good or protecting the rights of others, once this is done proportionately.
In considering a law that restricts rights, courts apply a proportionality test. First, the courts ask does the law restricting rights pursue an important objective in the public good. They will then consider if the law only violates rights as little as it needs to achieve this objective, and is not arbitrary or irrational.

Finally, the courts consider if the good done by the law can be said to justify-if it is in proportion to-the harm done to the rights
In applying this test, the courts give significant leeway to the Oireachtas..

That body is more skilled in making the complex decisions and trade offs needed for effective policy making.
It is also accountable to the people.

As regards OZ

It's constitutional there.

It may have been controversial but AFIK it hasn't been found to be illegal or unconstitutional.

They've a similar legal system inherited from them being a colony just like us.

Quarantine power

Section 51(ix) of the Constitution provides that the Commonwealth can pass laws for the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to quarantine.

The quarantine power has primarily been relied upon in the area of public health.[94] Public health ranges from the regulation of disease prevention to the regulation of tobacco and alcohol.

faceman

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

right, your just going to dodge the questions put to you about your use of the term 'detention centre' and the list of items that actually do happen in prisons compared to hotels, its against peoples rights and how the state is forcing people against their will.

I can ask again if you would like?

You twist words to suit your agenda. I don’t know how often you need it spelled out to you

wrote:

Ignoring the fact that you used the Journal as a source dispite the fact they cant even get the basics about 5km right, why do you insist on using the term 'detention centres' instead of 'quarantine centre' even?

Do you want to publish a list of sources that are acceptable to you? :rolleyes:

wrote:

Heres the second part, the part where you actually showed a marked seperation between the hotels and detention centres.

Exactly

wrote:

and for the third time I will ask you in what way have people no say in this considering it will be a pre-requisite in entering the state from abroad just like any other entry requirement placed on a foreign national who wishes to enter and they are absolutely free to choose not to buy the ticket, get on the plane and voluntarily go through passport control?

They can even opt out at passport control and will be facilitated with arranging a return flight to where they originated if they so desire. As opposed to a detention centre as you mentioned above, a place where people are held against their will and did not agree or freely enter in the first place.

Once again, for the umpteenth time, I’m not talking about tourism. Irish citizens and residents, Irish people with sick or dying family, what choice do they have again?

wrote:

Do you consider the tennis players in Australia to have been detained against their will?

Not familiar or interested in professional sport. Probably not a good idea to use sports players are a point of reference. Did many of them go through Dublin Airport in the last 6 weeks?

wrote:

Do you consider requiring a negative test to be against your will and forced medical intervention?

Its no different, its a requirement of entry.

Why are you comparing a covid test with mandatory detention? It’s just undermining your argument. You’re out of your depth Niner

faceman

caveat emptor wrote: »

I find the whole threatening to litigious a bit silly. We have laws and constitution. Any measures will be tested as they have been through out this. (See Gemma and John's historic case or Ryanairs PR stunt). It's very telling when someone says something is illegal or quotes human rights but then doesn't relate it to the particular law or legislation that is being violated or how a measure relates to it. It's usually an unfounded threat.

Take for instance David Kenny's opinion. He is assistant professor of law at Trinity College Dublin.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/mandatory-quarantine-allowable-under-the-constitution-1.4476110


Seems to the same here. I notice anyone from government nor the attorney general have detailed any specific issues with it.




As regards OZ

It's constitutional there.

It may have been controversial but AFIK it hasn't been found to be illegal or unconstitutional.

They've a similar legal system inherited from them being a colony just like us.

I suggest reading the sources I posted. Just because something is currently legal doesn’t make it right. After all in the Irish constitution it’s states a woman’s place is in the home.

UDAWINNER

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Majority of SF's support base is wasters who wouldn't know work if it introduced itself with a cover letter, they'll still get the Dole. It's the workers who will feel the pinch.

Baseless comments considering that sf got the hishest percentage vote in the country unless you think that we had a 25% unemploynment. Btw, what in the blue hell has sf got to do with a travel thread. I assume you're such a honourable ff/fg type that when you went abroad (during a pandemic:(), i presme you reastricted your movements. did you fcuk.

copeyhagen

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Baseless comments considering that sf got the hishest percentage vote in the country unless you think that we had a 25% unemploynment. Btw, what in the blue hell has sf got to do with a travel thread. I assume you're such a honourable ff/fg type that when you went abroad (during a pandemic:(), i presme you reastricted your movements. did you fcuk.

well said, i voted SF in the GE, as did nearly every person i know.

but sure we're all wasters, scumbags, paddys day shams etc etc.

In answer to the thread title.......5 more days. Cant come fast enough

RobitTV

Always wondered is moving abroad to live with a partner or family member 'essential' under the current travel regulations in Ireland?