All international travelers will be quarantined in hotels or designated facilities

[drron]

I agree on that, but my point was not that there are different regimes (there clearly are), but that what is happening in one state is irrelevant to what is happening in another. For example, if NT is charging passengers for their quarantine, it matters not that Victoria is footing the bill for people returning there. It is what it is... if you wanna fly to NT, you pay. If your airline doesn’t fly to SYD, but you have to fly to MEL and pay for quarantine... that’s just the way it is. It doesn’t matter if SYD’s quarantine if free.

Throughout the whole CV-19 people have been so busy comparing what is happening elsewhere, creating their own confusion when there needn’t be.

Though I did apply for a job in the NT and they would have paid me for the time of the quarantine in the NT.For some inexplicable reason they gave the job to a local!

 

[Himeno]

The entire reason they started requiring hotel quarantine for inbound travelers is because a small amount of people ignored their 2 week stay at home orders.
The government has been paying for said quarantine because they aren't giving anyone the option. It isn't fair to demand that someone pay for something that they have no choice in.

If governments want to stop paying for the hotels and other related quarantine costs, and instead force the traveler to, then they should allow them the option of completing the quarantine at home, while making it clear that any breaches will result in forced hotel quarantine at their expense. Someone who might have otherwise ignored quarantine orders might follow them if it is made clear to them that failure to do so will result in a forced 2 week "holiday" in a hotel of the governments choice and a ~$4000 bill. Meanwhile, those that would follow the quarantine requirements can do so at home without being forced to cough up money.

 

[DC3]

People entering Oz from overseas, sneaking out of hotel rooms, moving about in public, providing false addresses, and this is where we end up. And we are all paying the price.

Many did the right thing, but some did not. Authorities have no way of knowing who will not self-isolate. Like many crimes that are committed, the threat of penalties is no incentive for some.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

It isn't fair to demand that someone pay for something that they have no choice in.

Other than the 'choice' to come home. Especially by now, 10 weeks in.

If you don't have a choice to come home - medical emergency, or carer's leave for example - then I suspect you would also have an exemption from hotel quarantine.

 

[p--and--t]

It isn't fair to demand that someone pay for something that they have no choice in.

But that is exactly what a number of other countries are already doing or proposing to do.

China for example. You are tested on arrival, collected from the airport and taken to a hotel of the government's choosing and you pay the bill for hotel, food and security for 14days - no ifs or buts.

Cambodia you need to lodge $3,000 deposit on arrival with the gov if you want to travel there and then must pay for transport from the airport to a processing centre where you will pay a processing fee and a covid testing fee one night's accomodation and 3 meals fee. If you or anyone on you flight tests positive all of you will be taken to an isolation hotel for 14 days at your own expense and all services provided paid by you including sanitation and security and anything they can think of including a minimum of 4 covid tests at your expense per person travelling.

Thailand while abandoning 14day quarantine on arrival (all arrivals banned until June 30 anyway) have been talking about introducing a standard "traveller tax" (visa fee) which would be levied on all arrivals to go to government revenue to cover any increase in heath care costs in the country caused by foreigners.

Some countries are now insisting you cannot travel there unless you can prove you have travel insurance to a nominated value that covers covid and anything else - almost impossible to get or prohibitively expensive.

 

[Gremlin]

The issue I have with at home self-isolation when travelling from a higher risk country is that, even if followed appropriately, there is still a much greater risk of it leading to community transmission than a hotel quarantine stint.

If infected, you are still exposing others in the household and any visitors to the home, even without leaving the home yourself. This can be far more readily controlled with quarantine. The wider community pays a significant price for any community transmission, even if it is quickly identified and contained - eg 70+ people forced into 2 weeks isolation from the strawberry picker case.

 

[Pushka]

If infected, you are still exposing others in the household and any visitors to the home, even without leaving the home yourself. This can be far more readily controlled with quarantine. The wider community pays a significant price for any community transmission, even if it is quickly identified and contained - eg 70+ people forced into 2 weeks isolation from the strawberry picker case.

Agree. Even just getting from the airport to the isolation place presents a risk for someone. I remember a taxi driver being very unwell with Covid when they simply took a cruise passenger from circular quay to their home in Sydney.

 

[moa999]

you are still exposing others in the household and any visitors to the home, even without leaving the home yourself.

I think quarantine means quarantine - you are returning to an empty house (or an existing resident will also join you for 14 days) and no visitors.

Agree. More protections would need to be taken with say a specialised taxi service to return these people home - shields for driver and full clean after each trip for example

 

[Pushka]

I think quarantine means quarantine - you are returning to an empty house (or an existing resident will also join you for 14 days) and no visitors.

Agree. More protections would need to be taken with say a specialised taxi service to return these people home - shields for driver and full clean after each trip for example

My nephew who works in France returned just before the hotel quarantine was put in place. Escaped France by a day before their borders and trains stopped, and caught the last Emirates flight to Adelaide. My brother organised for him to stay in a cabin on a hills area camping site. They delivered food to him on the verandah and his children waved to him through the verandah window (they stay in Adelaide). He had no visitors allowed.

To get him from the Airport to the cabin my brother drove his car and left it in the car park and stayed in their other car until he arrived. They kept an eye on his car as it was left with the doors unlocked and key under the car mat. Of course that was also the time that the Qantas Baggage handlers issue arose but only the nephew had been in the terminal and they had stayed in their cars.

 

[PineappleSkip]

It isn't fair to demand that someone pay for something that they have no choice in

Yes, and many would say taxes are unfair. But they get charged!

Cheers skip

 

[Gremlin]

I think quarantine means quarantine - you are returning to an empty house (or an existing resident will also join you for 14 days) and no visitors.

I don't disagree that's how it SHOULD work. But a whole heap of others pay a big price if that's not how it DOES work.

Not related to a returning traveller scenario, but have a look at the strawberry picker case. Resident of a household with a positive COVID case. Should have been self-isolating himself. Didn't. Now a further 70+ people are self-isolating as a result. The strawberry farm he worked on lost pretty much their entire workforce for two weeks just as their crop was ready to be picked. That's a devastating situation for the farmer simply because one of his pickers didn't do what was expected. How do you think that farmer would feel about trusting people to do the right thing when self-isolating? Do you think the price he's paid is justified?

I get the desire to quarantine at home if you have a choice - I know I would. I also get that the majority would do the right thing - again, I know I would. But there is a significant cost to the community from those that don't. And the interests of the community should outweigh the interests of a small number of travellers.

 

[Happy Trails]

Thailand while abandoning 14day quarantine on arrival (all arrivals banned until June 30 anyway) have been talking about introducing a standard "traveller tax" (visa fee) which would be levied on all arrivals to go to government revenue to cover any increase in heath care costs in the country caused by foreigners.

Under measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, a 14-day quarantine is mandatory for all Thai nationals returning from abroad. The government provides free accommodation under an arrangement with hoteliers across the country for about 9,000 rooms. The participating hotels are reportedly paid 1,000 baht per person per day.

For those willing to pay for a slightly more upscale confinement, the following ASQ hotels have been evaluated and approved by the Ministry of Public Health and the Ministry of Defence. The prices shown are the basic room rates for 14 days:

Quarantine in style for up to B144,000

Thai people returning from abroad who don’t want to spend their 14-day coronavirus quarantine at a free government-provided site have some stylish options — if they feel like spending up to 144,000 baht.

www.bangkokpost.com

 

[moa999]

Quite like that Thai model. Basic hotel only unless you are willing to pay more

 

[antycbr]

My idea is an income contingent loan. Let people back in and they can pay quarantine either through their tax or if they want to leave Australia again.

HECS is like this and seems to work (apart from stopping people from leaving again - which arguably we should do for HECS/FEE-HELP)

I also think serviced apartments with balconies and kitchens would be a better idea and allow deliveries by supermarkets.

 

[sinophile888]

I also think serviced apartments with balconies and kitchens would be a better idea and allow deliveries by supermarkets.

I stayed at a new hotel/serviced apartment in a Melbourne suburb in March this year. It had a kitchen, a separate bedroom, lounge, dining area and laundry. Altogether over 50sq.m. And a balcony. The cost was very competitive with CBD hotel rooms. It was very close to many restaurants, cafes and supermarkets (for deliveries). It would be a far more pleasant two weeks staying there than in a small hotel room.

 

[antycbr]

I stayed at a new hotel/serviced apartment in a Melbourne suburb in March this year. It had a kitchen, a separate bedroom, lounge, dining area and laundry. Altogether over 50sq.m. And a balcony. The cost was very competitive with CBD hotel rooms. It was very close to many restaurants, cafes and supermarkets (for deliveries). It would be a far more pleasant two weeks staying there than in a small hotel room.

Staying in the suburbs shouldn’t matter... it’s not like you need to be close to anything in particular if you’re locked in!

 

[p--and--t]

Under measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, a 14-day quarantine is mandatory for all Thai nationals returning from abroad. The government provides free accommodation under an arrangement with hoteliers across the country for about 9,000 rooms. The participating hotels are reportedly paid 1,000 baht per person per day.

For those willing to pay for a slightly more upscale confinement, the following ASQ hotels have been evaluated and approved by the Ministry of Public Health and the Ministry of Defence. The prices shown are the basic room rates for 14 days:

Quarantine in style for up to B144,000

Thai people returning from abroad who don’t want to spend their 14-day coronavirus quarantine at a free government-provided site have some stylish options — if they feel like spending up to 144,000 baht.

www.bangkokpost.com

Yep that is the current situation for locals, but not foreigners. Non-Thais are currently banned until June 30 and then from what I have read, they are looking at a new regime for non-Thais.

However, the announced situation seems to change regularly and different gov ministers make a pronouncement that don't happen or reflect practice. Quite confusing.

 

[suze2000]

It isn't fair to demand that someone pay for something that they have no choice in.

Untrue. They DO have a choice. They can choose not to travel here.

And before anyone wails about compassionate cases, I'm old enough to remember when we feared the phone ringing in the middle of the night because it heralded news of a disaster on the other side of the country, that we could not possibly hope to attend because of the cost. We accepted that was the price of living away from our loved ones.

I don't understand why a home-detention lo-jack can't be used to ensure compliance by those who can meet the rules to quarantine in their home. They use them for suspected terrorists. Go more than 50m from your home, an alarm goes off. Try to remove it, an alarm goes off. And so on. They use them for criminals, if they are good enough for that, surely they are good enough to monitor quarantine?

Not related to a returning traveller scenario, but have a look at the strawberry picker case. Resident of a household with a positive COVID case. Should have been self-isolating himself. Didn't. Now a further 70+ people are self-isolating as a result.

Actually, it's worse than that - the COVID positive person hid the fact that the strawberry picker was living with him from authorities. I hope they throw the book at everyone who knew this was happening. And deport them if they can be. They have shown they don't respect our community enough to help protect it.

 

[dajop]

However, the announced situation seems to change regularly and different gov ministers make a pronouncement that don't happen or reflect practice. Quite confusing.

Aah, isn't that how Thailand works? If it wasn't so confusing, it wouldn't be Thailand.

 

[PineappleSkip]

I’d agree with user pays quarantine. Client who must be obeyed looking to get me back to Africa in July or August. ATM, destination is charging for 14 days quarantine (user - i.e. client - pays), which is acting as a brake. Free quarantine on return not acting as a brake, which is totally lop sided.

The other hindrance to them ATM is insurance. While there is a vast supply of people with symptoms, reported numbers in Africa are largely a function of number of test kits, testing stations and thus tests in the country. Generally there are few of any of these. The insurer can’t get any reliable data on incidence of COVID in destination, so case numbers reported are rubbish, and they won’t insure because they can’t price the risk.

cheers skip