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

josip wrote: »

Apologies if it's already been answered, but does anyone know which EU law the AG believes we will be in breach of, if we try to MHQ EU citizens?

My informed guess.

Fundamental freedoms - freedom of movement. But it may also relate to restricting the internal market.

Happydays2020 wrote: »

My informed guess.

Fundamental freedoms - freedom of movement. But it may also relate to restricting the internal market.

Also detaining Irish citizens is causing difficulties, even if they introduce irish legislation, you would be able to appeal to the European court.
Neither the government or the Irish people can cherry pick what they want in relation to EU laws and acts .
Ireland is a member and has to take the good with the bad.

ZX7R wrote: »

Also detaining Irish citizens is causing difficulties, even if they introduce irish legislation, you would be able to appeal to the European court.
Neither the government or the Irish people can cherry pick what they want in relation to EU laws and acts .
Ireland is a member and has to take the good with the bad.

Is Donnelly still genuinely pursuing adding European countries, or is he;
(a) trying not to admit the gross error he made.
(b) making it look like he is and in the process shifting the blame to FG (Coveney) so that the public can't blame him?

Does anyone actually foresee him getting his wish?

On another subject, did the €2000 fine ever come to pass or is it still €500?

Thanks.

Chuck Norris 2021 wrote: »

Is Donnelly still genuinely pursuing adding European countries, or is he;
(a) trying not to admit the gross error he made.
(b) making it look like he is and in the process shifting the blame to FG (Coveney) so that the public can't blame him?

Does anyone actually foresee him getting his wish?

On another subject, did the €2000 fine ever come to pass or is it still €500?

Thanks.

Personally i think Donnelly is playing a political blame game, once he has someone to blame, he save face.
Not sure about the fines

bubblypop wrote: »

I believe it's true, a number of gardai off in self isolation.
Presume some court staff will be now also.

NPHET/Donnelly/Irish medias prayers all answered if it is true. She'll become the new poster child for the anti travel mob. That old story from last year can be laid to rest.

There's a real campaign being launched today;

Gabriel Scally: Ireland could open for business with proper quarantine measures
IRELAND

I've searched online, and despite being a professor in a UK university, he's never been quoted by the British government or media???

Chuck Norris 2021 wrote: »

NPHET/Donnelly/Irish medias prayers all answered if it is true. She'll become the new poster child for the anti travel mob. That old story from last year can be laid to rest.

There's a real campaign being launched today;

Gabriel Scally: Ireland could open for business with proper quarantine measures
IRELAND

I've searched online, and despite being a professor in a UK university, he's never been quoted by the British government or media???

More likely it will open a can of worms,
when where how was she infected.

Could easily be a case she was infected as a close contact from the court, prison, garda.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Chuck Norris 2021 wrote: »

From breaking news;

"has tested positive for Covid-19, according to the mother of her friend"

How reliable this information is, is anyone's guess.

Where did she catch the virus?

Hector Savage wrote: »

Let me extend that to "Does anyone on the thread realistically see travelling in 2022 ? Genuine question"

Possibly a lot of countries around the world may begin to travel but Ireland i doubt it. They are just looking to add as many countries to the quarantine list as they can. Once they are added it will be difficult to reverse because of the “”variants “” so eventually we won’t have many options where to travel to.

By the autumn or the end of the year we might have a better idea where we are at.

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

But she didn't get the supposed essential boob job so that's about 6k still in the bank. So she could pay for the hotel but didn't want to.

The hotel restriction that was announced before she travelled. Mammy (who states she is a frontline worker) can make whatever biased argument she wants but the fact is that the requirement was announced before they traveled and if you were going in5 holiday and didn't know that, you must spend the rest of the year in a cave.

I would suspect that they were never going for cosmetic surgery. They just made the bookings like the people who made dentist bookings in Lanzarote - i.e. in case they were stopped and asked whether their trip was essential. So possibly they never had the money for that.

Look I'm not defending them. They swanned off on a holiday in the middle of a pandemic to a covid hotspot. I get that they might not have known about the mandatory hotel quarantine - it took so long to come in that I wouldn't have known the exact date it was going to go live two weeks before it eventually did. And I read the papers every day. Perhaps I would have made it my business to know if I was choosing to swan off on holidays, but if I didn't regularly read the news I'm not sure that I would have. And you could easily think that it only applied to foreign nationals.

So I would think they actually didn't have the money for the hotel. Or if they did, they didn't want to declare it to the authorities in case it effected their lone parent allowance, who knows? The point is, one of them caught covid, in Dubai and it would have been highly likely that she would have infected her children or her parents if she had been allowed to isolate at home rather than in hotel quarantine.

Whether that effects the constitutional case or not is hard to know. Of course it assists the government narrative that hotel quarantine is proportionate, but constitutional issues are decided by a panel of judges, not a jury, and they are generally pretty immune to public opinion. They look at the law, and judgements made in the past and in other countries in how to apply the law. And that's it.

Chuck Norris 2021 wrote: »

Given the circus that has emerged with so few detainees so far, imagine the mess that would result from adding further European countries. I can only imagine the response Donnelly is going to receive when he makes further proposals. The best thing he can do right now is to identify and add obscure nations with no direct links to bulk out the list and appease the mob.
If he continues on his crusade, it'll be interesting to see how they deal with the North. Given the unfortunate unrest up there I doubt they'll stand for an 'all Ireland approach' to travel and will align with the UK. And who is going to broach the subject of border checks after fighting so hard to prevent a hard border. A more reasonable response to travel come summer would serve to protect the country far more than forcing people to use back doors.

I agree that it would have been a worse mess had we added France, Germany and Italy. But I don't agree that they shouldn't be added because of "the number of Irish living there" or "but the EU rules say...", because it really doesn't matter if the covid positive person coming from that country is Irish or French, and other EU countries are imposing hotel quarantine, so the EU rules on this are kind of out the window.

We have to accept that there will always be a backdoor into the country through the North, and there is a possibility that the Brazillian/Breton/Timbucktoo variant will come in to the Republic over the border. I don't think that's completely a convincing argument for not imposing quarantine on arrivals through Dublin Airport though.