Predictions of when international flights may resume/bans lifted

[mviy]

Completely agree and my sympathies to people caught in that situation. It could easily have been myself caught up in that scenario so I really do understand. I feel that in the community the complete lack of a coherent national approach to our internal borders is doing significant damage to businesses, families and to the broader economy.

Considering my family member overseas generally visits for under a week, hotel quarantine would still be a problem for that family member visiting. But I'd be prepared to quarantine in both directions to go and visit. I wouldn't want to be stuck overseas despite testing negative and be unable to get back for months though.

If they're not charging enough to cover the hotel quarantine costs to have a decent number of beds they should increase the prices. It would also be perfectly reasonable for anyone departing Australia now to have to pay more for quarantine on their return than those that haven't been in Australia since before the pandemic. If they increase the prices they could provide more quarantine beds, get people home who are stuck overseas and then once that backlog's cleared they could ease restrictions on travelling overseas a bit. There just doesn't appear to be the political will to do that.

 

[Pushka]

Maybe Bangladesh, Brunei, Cook Islands, Canada, India, Cyprus, Fiji, Ghana, Kenya, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Nauru, New Zealand, Pakistan, PNG, Samoa, Singapore, Solomons, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, UK , Vanuatu, - probably missed the relevant one.

 

[hb13]

The celebrities that are granted exemptions and allowed to quarantine in a private residence have to pay for their own security, cleaning etc. The leg work is no doubt done by the production companies but it certainly isn’t cheap to do quarantine in a private residence.
Given the structures they have to put into place for the exemption I’d say they are the same risk as those in hotel quarantine.
Allowing anyone who wants to quarantine at home with their family is another massive level of risk.

There are exemptions in NSW for unaccompanied minors to quarantine at home with their family. It’s strictly monitored, the entire family is quarantined for the 14 days and all tested before release.

I'm sorry, but that is besides the point. The government has decided to implement a blanket rule for everyone, or so they say. This also happened to tennis stars who were allowed out to train for 5 hours per day. Are you also going to tell me that was as low risk as hotel quarantine too? Because there were hundred of tennis players and their training staff allowed out for 5 hours per day during quarantine.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your general theory. But the government has decided this blanket rule. The government has decided that they don't care enough about 40k stranded Australians overseas who have been stranded for months. This is the same government that promised these Australians will be back home for Christmas in 2020.

I'm not talking about the level of risk here, because I believe that can be managed well without the absolutely ridiculous caps we have in place. I'm asking the question: Why would you put in a blanket rule, for "health" reasons, and then break it?

 

[hb13]

There is a natural tendency for people to keep focusing on "why does xx_ get special treatment?", when the real problem is that "special treatment" can't be implemented more widely. Allowing diplomatic staff to quarantine at home in Canberra, for example, has been a non-event. And surely some common-sense exceptions could have been made for people traveling from basically irrelevant parts of Perth over the first few days, if only the bureaucratic will and capacity existed.

Common sense and risk management unfortunately go out the window when the only acceptable number is, um, doughnut.

Just to be clear, that isn't my focus. I'm not living in a fantasy world where I think some people don't get different treatment depending on status/money etc. And frankly that isn't my gripe here.

I agree 100% that some common-sense exemptions can be and should be granted. My issue is with the hypocrisy of this government by saying that there is a blanket rule, it applies for every single person and saying the reason is health.

There are better ways around this - but the government has decided to publicly maintain a blanket rule for everyone. If that's the case, no one should be exempt.

 

[Seat0B]

I think if he waits until 2022 he will lose the election.The poll numbers are changing slowly with more people gradually switching to the no border closures camp.
A poll currently running at news.com.au has robust contact tracing and living with the virus at 47% and hard border closures at 53%.
So my guess is announcing some form of reopened border in August/September with an election in September/October.

The politics will trump the virus.

I vote for @drron for PM!!! I love this border opening timetable.

 

[Seat0B]

If we could travel relatively freely within the country, I think the desire for international borders to be open would probably be less.

well yes, sort of - but not for those of us with family overseas.

 

[Seat0B]

But we have to look at the reason 'why' premiers are closing state borders. It's because of the potential risk. The guy in Perth was out in the community for days, potentially spreading the virus.

The evidence just does not seem to stack up for me for the border closures and full lockdowns. Even people who have had the "highly infectious" strain and who have been out in the community for days don't seem to have been infecting others - eg the cleaner in Brisbane and the Brisbane lockdown - no cases, three days of no cases in WA. I understand being cautious, but the response really seems akin to trying to crack an egg with a sledgehammer.

 

[Seat0B]

Considering my family member overseas generally visits for under a week, hotel quarantine would still be a problem for that family member visiting. But I'd be prepared to quarantine in both directions to go and visit. I wouldn't want to be stuck overseas despite testing negative and be unable to get back for months though.

I totally agree - my circumstances are very similar. I would go visit in a flash as I now, thanks to a COVID induced retirement (all business dried up), have plenty of time. But it is the fear of not being able to return with flight cancellations, cuts to the inbound caps and high cost of quarantine that plays on my mind. That plus now the apparent risk of catching COVID in quarantine .

 

[oznflfan]

I vote for @drron for PM!!! I love this border opening timetable.

I'd still be happy with very beginning of 2022.

Good news overnight on Astra Zeneca vaccine, with published preliminary data in The Lancet showing after 1 dose, transmissability of COVID has been shown to reduce by 67%.

This is the silver bullet that Scomo is talking about, he acknowledges they know vaccine will protect and reduce illness, but they also need to know vaccine also reduces transmissability. In his own words on ACA interview, if both of these can be scientifically and formally proven, borders may open sooner than you think. This worldwide data will be held well before end of 2021, and given our vaccination program finishes October 2021, let's call it December 2021, anyone for Bali flight on New Years Day?

 

[Seat0B]

I'd still be happy with very beginning of 2022.

Good news overnight on Astra Zeneca vaccine, with published preliminary data in The Lancet showing after 1 dose, transmissability of COVID has been shown to reduce by 67%.

This is the silver bullet that Scomo is talking about, he acknowledges they know vaccine will protect and reduce illness, but they also need to know vaccine also reduces transmissability. In his own words on ACA interview, if both of these can be scientifically and formally proven, borders may open sooner than you think. This worldwide data will be held well before end of 2021, and given our vaccination program finishes October 2021, let's call it December 2021, anyone for Bali flight on New Years Day?

Nah, but I will be looking for seats to Japan in January 2022 and hoping for another bumper ski season like this year's!

 

[Pushka]

I'd still be happy with very beginning of 2022.

Good news overnight on Astra Zeneca vaccine, with published preliminary data in The Lancet showing after 1 dose, transmissability of COVID has been shown to reduce by 67%.

This is the silver bullet that Scomo is talking about, he acknowledges they know vaccine will protect and reduce illness, but they also need to know vaccine also reduces transmissability. In his own words on ACA interview, if both of these can be scientifically and formally proven, borders may open sooner than you think. This worldwide data will be held well before end of 2021, and given our vaccination program finishes October 2021, let's call it December 2021, anyone for Bali flight on New Years Day?

Now even the Russian one has come up trumps according to Lancet with a success rate of 92%.

Post automatically merged: Feb 3, 2021

Nah, but I will be looking for seats to Japan in January 2022 and hoping for another bumper ski season like this year's!

Seems we are booking seats to UK for April 2022 for sons Spring wedding. Everyone please and for those who can, cross their toes as well.

 

[mviy]

But it is the fear of not being able to return with flight cancellations, cuts to the inbound caps and high cost of quarantine that plays on my mind. That plus now the apparent risk of catching COVID in quarantine .

Indeed. I don't want to go right now, but it would be nice if later this year once it's relatively safe to go to e.g. the UK, to be allowed to make my own mind up about whether the risk is acceptable rather than have the nanny state tell me I can't go.

 

[hb13]

Now even the Russian one has come up trumps according to Lancet with a success rate of 92%.

Post automatically merged: Feb 3, 2021

Seems we are booking seats to UK for April 2022 for sons Spring wedding. Everyone please and for those who can, cross their toes as well.

I've just checked - I can cross my toes, which I'm doing for you and for me to visit family in Oz

 

[kamchatsky]

I think if he waits until 2022 he will lose the election.The poll numbers are changing slowly with more people gradually switching to the no border closures camp.
A poll currently running at news.com.au has robust contact tracing and living with the virus at 47% and hard border closures at 53%.
So my guess is announcing some form of reopened border in August/September with an election in September/October.

The politics will trump the virus.

I heard from the radio (2GB: Ben Fordham) this morning that ScoMo is indicating to prepare for a possible election this year. everyone is betting on September due to lack of Parliament sitting dates on that month.

 

[Pushka]

I've just checked - I can cross my toes, which I'm doing for you and for me to visit family in Oz

Deal.

 

[trevella]

I totally agree - my circumstances are very similar. I would go visit in a flash as I now, thanks to a COVID induced retirement (all business dried up), have plenty of time. But it is the fear of not being able to return with flight cancellations, cuts to the inbound caps and high cost of quarantine that plays on my mind. That plus now the apparent risk of catching COVID in quarantine .

I'd say you'd be a perfect candidate for home quarantine, but you didn't seem all that keen about affording me the same consideration:

We just had an example in Canberra of a foreign diplomat who has tested positive in the last couple of days, but because he was a diplomat, was not required to quarantine in Sydney where he arrived, like anyone else would have been. Instead he drove to Canberra, and may or may not have stopped on the way, may or may not have been doing a home based quarantine, that may or may not have involved his family as well. It is infuriating that over-entitled people like that are above the rules that apply to everyone else. I understand obligations under Geneva protocols for diplomats, but really - the virus obviously cannot tell him apart from everyone/anyone else, clearly does not know (or care) who he is. Selfish actions like this have exposed others.

 

[Seat0B]

Indeed. I don't want to go right now, but it would be nice if later this year once it's relatively safe to go to e.g. the UK, to be allowed to make my own mind up about whether the risk is acceptable rather than have the nanny state tell me I can't go.

100% agree with you.

 

[Seat0B]

I'd say you'd be a perfect candidate for home quarantine, but you didn't seem all that keen about affording me the same consideration:

well, it's not personal @trevella . For me, it's pretty much as @hb13 says below.

I'm not talking about the level of risk here, because I believe that can be managed well without the absolutely ridiculous caps we have in place. I'm asking the question: Why would you put in a blanket rule, for "health" reasons, and then break it?

In my opinion, there should be no exemptions or special treatment for "important" people, because the virus actually does not care that you are a diplomat, or a footy player, or a tennis or cricket player, a movie star or some other celebrity, or even that I am just a little person nobody. Given the right conditions, it will happily infect all of us on an equal opportunity basis. So, if it is a health issue, then everyone should follow the same health rules, diplomats included. If there can be exemptions for some, then that just makes a nonsense of the whole thing. It becomes not a health issue at all but a privilege issue.

And that is just what I said in my original post that you quoted - that diplomat was excused from the onerous rules that applied at that time to everyone else and may have put others at risk by having special rules that meant they were free to do things that others were not. So I would happily afford you the consideration of home quarantine, as long as the same courtesy were made available for me. And of course it isn't - because, I say again, I am just a numpty nobody with no power to fight the unfairness of the variable rules.

Additionally, I believe that the government owes a high duty of care to quarantine guests because the government is mandating the quarantine, and removing all choice of hotel from the quarantine guest. There is ample legal precedent that a higher duty of care is owed to people in similar circumstances such as people in prisons, people in disability homes etc. If a person is forced to quarantine in a place not of their choosing, they should be able to be confident that they will not leave the quarantine in worse health than when they entered. There are now several examples of people who did not have COVID at entry catching COVID during quarantine, which is something that I do fear about enforced and no-choice of venue hotel quarantine.

So all up, I think we might be in basic agreement, that there could be a case for permitting home quarantine.

But maybe where we differ is that I say that if you offer or allow home quarantine for one, you need to allow it for all those who can meet sensible criteria based on relevant factors such as willingness to be supervised in the quarantine and suitable premises, rather than on their membership of a privileged class of people such as sporting superstars, celebrities and diplomats. And of course, our nanny state has already decided that none of us little people could be trusted to home quarantine, only the special ones, like footy players. My consistent opinions about their suitability and evidence of their (non) capacity to adhere to quarantine conditions can be seen in my earlier thread about the special treatment offered to footballers.

 

[Seat0B]

Seems we are booking seats to UK for April 2022 for sons Spring wedding. Everyone please and for those who can, cross their toes as well.

Crossing everything for you @Pushka, and holding my mouth "just so" for extra concentration and focus.

 

[Pushka]

I'd say you'd be a perfect candidate for home quarantine, but you didn't seem all that keen about affording me the same consideration:

But we don’t get that opportunity. You do. That’s the issue here. If it’s health based then that exception makes no sense.