Predictions of when international flights may resume/bans lifted

[Pushka]

Yeh it is unbelievable. Mental health has been really bad, but it is all ok, because Coronavirus is under control - so let's not worry about anything else. It is a shocking attitude, and it is a shame to see really.

It's the young people who are suffering the most, and that is the worst of it. Oh, and two murders. SA has had a bad sad weekend.

 

[dajop]

Well, mental health issues have been shoved out the back door. SA had four fatalities on the road just this weekend, of young people. With a couple being single occupant crashes, into a tree, well, I do wonder about that.

I’ve read several reports that in Australia at least suicide rates did not change or actually decreased during 2020 (whilst increasing in, for example the US), so it could be that controlling the disease maintains “normality” (unfortunately). Although I haven’t seen any full year stats.

And this of course says nothing about suffering and non-suicidal mental health issues (anecdotal reports suggest big increases in calls to help lines). And indeed a lot of theory suggests that during crises (eg wars) people focus on other threats so 2021, where the threat doesn’t seem quite so significant could really be the danger period where the mental health issues escalate as people focus on their day to day lives, coupled with the removal of the significant support for the economy, one could easily see things getting a lot worse.

An interesting discussion in link below , ultimately warning that with economic suffering increasing that things can deteriorate:

COVID’s mental health fallout will last a long time. Here’s how we’re targeting pandemic depression and anxiety

Financial hardships in particular are likely to lead to ongoing mental health problems, even as the pandemic subsides. Our program could help many people whose mental health has suffered during COVID.

theconversation.com

 

[Pushka]

I’ve read several reports that in Australia at least suicide rates did not change or actually decreased during 2020 (whilst increasing in, for example the US), so it could be that controlling the disease maintains “normality” (unfortunately). Although I haven’t seen any full year stats.

And this of course says nothing about suffering and non-suicidal mental health issues (anecdotal reports suggest big increases in calls to help lines). And indeed a lot of theory suggests that during crises (eg wars) people focus on other threats so 2021, where the threat doesn’t seem quite so significant could really be the danger period where the mental health issues escalate as people focus on their day to day lives, coupled with the removal of the significant support for the economy, one could easily see things getting a lot worse.

An interesting discussion in link below , ultimately warning that with economic suffering increasing that things can deteriorate:

COVID’s mental health fallout will last a long time. Here’s how we’re targeting pandemic depression and anxiety

Financial hardships in particular are likely to lead to ongoing mental health problems, even as the pandemic subsides. Our program could help many people whose mental health has suffered during COVID.

theconversation.com

Well we work in the mental health area and new bookings can’t be made for many weeks. Additionally our business focus has changed from strategic kinds of issues to a focus on health, well being and resilience.

 

[dajop]

Well we work in the mental health area and new bookings can’t be made for many weeks. Additionally our business focus has changed from strategic kinds of issues to a focus on health, well being and resilience.

Yes it is not surprising, a lot of people will be struggling. It is really quite logical. Let’s hope those in power see that as well and don’t forget about the extra support required.

I know a lot of people blame it on government restrictions / reaction , but I think it can be more attributed to the pandemic itself - in places where the governments weren’t quite so strict, language was more measured, and freedoms maintained - mental health doesn’t seem particularly rosy either ... lots of economic and anxiety issues and plenty of self-initiated restrictions.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yet you continue to defend a system that has blocked its citizens from leaving for a year (and likely to be at least another year) and doesn't do enough in regards to its citizens who are stranded and running out of money overseas.

No. I'm definitely not defending ‘the system’ If you believe that then we are speaking at cross purposes.

However, I’m pragmatic, and don’t think we need to throw out the baby with the bath water. Certain decisions, within the current - albeit flawed - framework make sense.

 

[kamchatsky]

Well there are some other exceptions granted for non-Australians to come to Australia. This is quite a special case though and I certainly welcome him here:

Fugitive former Hong Kong lawmaker Ted Hui moves to Australia

Hui says he is in Australia on a tourist visa, thanks the authorities for exempting him from strict Covid-19 entry rules.

www.scmp.com

It must be special dispensation from the immigration minister given he is on tourist visa (for now). I have no idea how he flew from UK directly though given the ban for passengers from UK?

 

[mviy]

I have no idea how he flew from UK directly though given the ban for passengers from UK?

Presumably the minister got DFAT to coordinate with the airlines similarly to how they would for Australians that are stranded and completely broke having gone through all their savings.

 

[Flashback]

Well there are some other exceptions granted for non-Australians to come to Australia. This is quite a special case though and I certainly welcome him here:

Fugitive former Hong Kong lawmaker Ted Hui moves to Australia

Hui says he is in Australia on a tourist visa, thanks the authorities for exempting him from strict Covid-19 entry rules.

www.scmp.com

It must be special dispensation from the immigration minister given he is on tourist visa (for now). I have no idea how he flew from UK directly though given the ban for passengers from UK?

Surely you've answered your own question? You're not 'banned' if you have an exemption granted, to enter.

 

[oznflfan]

Back to purpose of the thread, Scomo at AFR Business Summit said all the right things that support re-opening. This both for us leaving (will full vaccination COVID could be treated like a bad flu), and incoming (temporary migration will need to be turbocharged as he is not willing to have another season for farmers where their crops died in the ground or on trees as they couldn't get employees to pick them - and he acknowledged the efforts to get Aussies to do this failed and not worth trying again - they have to go back to imported labour).

This would surely need mid to end of this year we'll get XX thousands of Pacific and SE Asian workers coming in quarantine free, of course only if vaccinated by approved vaccines. No other way.

My big European summer trip in 2023 I have no doubts will be fine. UK, France & Poland.

A quick trip to maybe Indonesia, Malaysia or Cambodia in March 2022 I am hopeful to be able to leave and return quarantine free*.

*Crossed fingers.

 

[RAM]

One of the articles I read an airline stated that they do get the occasional direction to carry someone deemed vulnerable by DFAT. The airline can apply for a temporary exemption on the numbers it is allowed to carry on that flight, but if that is not granted, someone else has to be bumped.

One of the QF repatriation flights talked about on AFF carried a number of pax who were not vulnerable, and didn't consider themselves vulnerable. So the system doesn't seem to be working perfectly.

Yes it is hard to understand exactly why the Federal Govt appears to have zero interest in solving the issue of 'vulnerable' Australians vs dual Nationals seeking a safe haven (many of whom have never filed a tax return in Australia btw).

The 'Howard Springs' flights' seats are being sold on a first-come first-served basis. I have not seen anything on DFAT's web site mentioning any 'prioirity' allocation.

There have been a number of media reports that it appears to be run as a blanket email/txt message sent out during Australian work hours that 'A flight on X Y 21 is now available to be booked at $acbs for economy etc.

There appears to be no set time of day this notification is issued (but some time during Australian East coast working hours). So if someone in the UK/Europe is an early riser & social media/email/phone addict they stand a much higher chance of booking. From media articles - most flights are booked out before many even see the messages.

NZ, on the other hand, has a priority system that allocates hotel quarantine space for arrivals on any commercial flight (no subsidy to Air NZ being given there). 'Vulnerable NZers' (from what's been published) are made to wait up to 5 days (how inexcusable!!!!!!!). Foreign nationals with no business or family connections go on a queue which has no max wait time but seems to be (judging from the American family I spoke with who arrived in Australia using NZ as the entry point) less than 3 weeks.

NZ, it seems, has the political will (and possibly not the level of political donations?) to look after 'vulnerable' NZers. The Australian Federal Govt has its spin & priorities elsewhere. If the NZ Govt did not & does not fear being labelled racist - why possibly does the Australian Govt?

Seat0B
I’m with @hb13 on this one @dajop. There should be no impediment to an Australian citizen being in Australia for any reason at all, or no reason, or a reason that they don’t have to declare to anyone, or just because they feel like it, as often as they want to. And if that normal right of citizenship were to be allowed to all citizens, then the fact that you might make 3 visits here in 12-18 month period (which is absolutely your right as a citizen) would not preclude any other citizen from getting home.

As the quote goes: "Up to a point, Lord Copper!"

As one person posted earlier, they are certain that if several AFFers had come together early last year - this whole mess/disgrace would have been solved. I agree 100%.

Here is one possible re-working of the NZ system (which I have not found a detailed explanation of how exactly they prioritise) - to solve this for Australia.

_________________________​

If an Australian citizen or permanent resident is normally living in Australia & lodging an Australian tax return (or retired & no longer required to lodge one due to income level etc) - then yes they should be home yesterday. Early on, the number of such people could have all been brought back in ten days if the HQ capacity had been dedicated solely to this component. Or within a month if just 1/3rd of the HQ capacity was allocated.

_______________________________
​

Eg: People given clearance to exit to visit ill/dying relative or clear up affairs of deceased close relative - priority = top.

It seems incredible to have to type the following (in the 21st not 17th century):

Eg: Australians stranded overseas having been on a (pure, non working) holiday - priority = top. I wonder just how many 'diplomatic staff' who are based in the exact same countries have been back & forth to Australia since these 'tourists' were stranded. I am led to believe (but have not verified) that these public servants have been back at least once (many several times) since last March whilst 'stranded vulnerable Australians' in the same countries remain stranded. I am not talking about the ambassadors, consuls etc but 'staff & their families'.

Not to mention certain ex-Fed MPs flying overseas & back on Govt aircraft with the rest of the seats empty whilst there were/are 'vulnerable Australians' left behind.

______________________________​

If they have never lodged an Australian tax return then that is a different matter & my (harsh) priority would be just in front of foreign nationals (celebrity/connected person/rich person/tourist).

If they have previously lodged tax retruns but not lived in Australia for more than 5 years - then priority ahead of those directly above.

The reality is & was starkly different.

Initially 70% of Australian citizens registered with DFAT were in (descending order from decining memory) India, South Africa, Vietnam & The Philipines. Most are/were dual-Nationals. In June last year there were 3 chartered plane loads 100% full of people into Melbourne from Nepal (for example) with more than half not being Australian citizens/permanent residents.

Subsequently there were a number of media articles about families being separated with the children being overseas & cared for by their grandparents while one (or more) of their parents works in Australia. It is totally understandable that given the CV risks they then wanted to bring their children to Australia - to me the stumbling block is where the children have never lived in Australia previously, and are not Australian citizens nor permanent residents.

Yes the children are 'vulnerable' to catching CV in their country of birth but so is every other child living in that country. From a parent's perspective it is totally understandable that they want to bring them to the Australian safe haven. But their priority should not be above families/children who normally live in Australia but are stranded overseas IMHO.

 

[RAM]

Turing to a first world (addict) problem - horrendous news yesterday.

SIA has removed the entire 1st Class inventory both reward seating & revenue bookings (previously through to October 31st, 2021) now through to the end of Feb 2022. So it seems SIA B777s and A380s are unlikely to be seen for much longer.

Suggests that despite vaccinations ramping up world-wide SIA is less optimistic about the rebound of international traffic (& the need for their high capacity aircraft).

Certainly potentially devalues the Krisflyer points holdings given the inability to use them in any meaningful way - unless another grudging extension is granted.

 

[MelMel]

N

Yes it is hard to understand exactly why the Federal Govt appears to have zero interest in solving the issue of 'vulnerable' Australians vs dual Nationals seeking a safe haven (many of whom have never filed a tax return in Australia btw).

The 'Howard Springs' flights' seats are being sold on a first-come first-served basis. I have not seen anything on DFAT's web site mentioning any 'prioirity' allocation.

There have been a number of media reports that it appears to be run as a blanket email/txt message sent out during Australian work hours that 'A flight on X Y 21 is now available to be booked at $acbs for economy etc.

There appears to be no set time of day this notification is issued (but some time during Australian East coast working hours). So if someone in the UK/Europe is an early riser & social media/email/phone addict they stand a much higher chance of booking. From media articles - most flights are booked out before many even see the messages.

NZ, on the other hand, has a priority system that allocates hotel quarantine space for arrivals on any commercial flight (no subsidy to Air NZ being given there). 'Vulnerable NZers' (from what's been published) are made to wait up to 5 days (how inexcusable!!!!!!!). Foreign nationals with no business or family connections go on a queue which has no max wait time but seems to be (judging from the American family I spoke with who arrived in Australia using NZ as the entry point) less than 3 weeks.

NZ, it seems, has the political will (and possibly not the level of political donations?) to look after 'vulnerable' NZers. The Australian Federal Govt has its spin & priorities elsewhere. If the NZ Govt did not & does not fear being labelled racist - why possibly does the Australian Govt?

Seat0B
I’m with @hb13 on this one @dajop. There should be no impediment to an Australian citizen being in Australia for any reason at all, or no reason, or a reason that they don’t have to declare to anyone, or just because they feel like it, as often as they want to. And if that normal right of citizenship were to be allowed to all citizens, then the fact that you might make 3 visits here in 12-18 month period (which is absolutely your right as a citizen) would not preclude any other citizen from getting home.

As the quote goes: "Up to a point, Lord Copper!"

As one person posted earlier, they are certain that if several AFFers had come together early last year - this whole mess/disgrace would have been solved. I agree 100%.

Here is one possible re-working of the NZ system (which I have not found a detailed explanation of how exactly they prioritise) - to solve this for Australia.

_________________________​

If an Australian citizen or permanent resident is normally living in Australia & lodging an Australian tax return (or retired & no longer required to lodge one due to income level etc) - then yes they should be home yesterday. Early on, the number of such people could have all been brought back in ten days if the HQ capacity had been dedicated solely to this component. Or within a month if just 1/3rd of the HQ capacity was allocated.

_______________________________
​

Eg: People given clearance to exit to visit ill/dying relative or clear up affairs of deceased close relative - priority = top.

It seems incredible to have to type the following (in the 21st not 17th century):

Eg: Australians stranded overseas having been on a (pure, non working) holiday - priority = top. I wonder just how many 'diplomatic staff' who are based in the exact same countries have been back & forth to Australia since these 'tourists' were stranded. I am led to believe (but have not verified) that these public servants have been back at least once (many several times) since last March whilst 'stranded vulnerable Australians' in the same countries remain stranded. I am not talking about the ambassadors, consuls etc but 'staff & their families'.

Not to mention certain ex-Fed MPs flying overseas & back on Govt aircraft with the rest of the seats empty whilst there were/are 'vulnerable Australians' left behind.

______________________________​

If they have never lodged an Australian tax return then that is a different matter & my (harsh) priority would be just in front of foreign nationals (celebrity/connected person/rich person/tourist).

If they have previously lodged tax retruns but not lived in Australia for more than 5 years - then priority ahead of those directly above.

The reality is & was starkly different.

Initially 70% of Australian citizens registered with DFAT were in (descending order from decining memory) India, South Africa, Vietnam & The Philipines. Most are/were dual-Nationals. In June last year there were 3 chartered plane loads 100% full of people into Melbourne from Nepal (for example) with more than half not being Australian citizens/permanent residents.

Subsequently there were a number of media articles about families being separated with the children being overseas & cared for by their grandparents while one (or more) of their parents works in Australia. It is totally understandable that given the CV risks they then wanted to bring their children to Australia - to me the stumbling block is where the children have never lived in Australia previously, and are not Australian citizens nor permanent residents.

Yes the children are 'vulnerable' to catching CV in their country of birth but so is every other child living in that country. From a parent's perspective it is totally understandable that they want to bring them to the Australian safe haven. But their priority should not be above families/children who normally live in Australia but are stranded overseas IMHO.

Not all Diplomatic staff are travelling back and forth. I have family who are Diplomatic staff in Rome and they gave up their mid term trip home as they did not want to take airline seats or quarantine places from people who desperately need to come home.

 

[RAM]

N

Not all Diplomatic staff are travelling back and forth. I have family who are Diplomatic staff in Rome and they gave up their mid term trip home as they did not want to take airline seats or quarantine places from people who desperately need to come home.

Good on them!

A shame that more do not follow their fine example.

Remember last August the security guard from one of our embassies was allowed to bypass quarantine (as was the 'National' Cabinet's ruling) landed in Sydney & travelled to Qld.

"Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has decided to go it alone and overrule the national exemption to COVID-19 rules for diplomatic and consular staff.

The circumstances surrounding the COVID-positive private security contractor who sparked the policy change are under investigation, with NSW and Queensland health officials providing differing accounts and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade advising it did not support the man's application for a quarantine exemption when he arrived home."

It came as Queensland police investigate documents used to grant diplomatic quarantine exemptions to the private security contractor who landed in Sydney from Afghanistan last week, caught a connecting flight to the Sunshine Coast and then drove to his Toowoomba home.

The Australian Embassy in Kabul wrote a note saying he was "travelling on essential government business" to support his return to Australia, not to assist with quarantine exemption applications.

​

 

[Toula92122]

Yes it is hard to understand exactly why the Federal Govt appears to have zero interest in solving the issue of 'vulnerable' Australians vs dual Nationals seeking a safe haven (many of whom have never filed a tax return in Australia btw).

Just because one was not resident in Oz and never filed a tax return did not mean no payment of tax. We were gone for 22 years but the Oz government was taking 10% withholding tax on any interest or dividends coming our way and we were not using any tax payer funded facilities. No use of medicare, no children in school etc. I would imagine it would be the same for many expats who held property or investments in Oz. So if anything the Oz Government were profiting from us. Only Australian government use was the consulate to purchase a passport and then we were charged an outrageous surcharge not paid by Oz based citizens. Is it fair a Oz based outside Oz has to pay for Consular service but a travelling citizen can lose documents or get themselves into trouble and not be charged anything?

 

[zenyattamondatta]

Is it fair a Oz based outside Oz

No. A citizen is a citizen is a citizen. People just need to mind their own effing business. And the government's inability to get citizens and permanent residents (of all descriptions) "home" needs to be seen as what it is: a complete failure.

 

[dajop]

And the government's inability to get citizens and permanent residents (of all descriptions) "home" needs to be seen as what it is: a complete failure.

It's interesting to compare to NZ and Singapore, who both have been reasonably good at preventing spread (although NZ has, like Australia, had a few issues with Hotel Quarantine from time to time). I am not sure what the NZ weekly intake is, Singapore takes in about 6000-7000 a week into its hotel quarantine system, supported by a population of 5m people. Australia has that many supported by 4-5 major cities and a population of 25m. But for some reason (maybe its the behaviour of a significant minority) the Australian HQ system seems incredibly complex. Perhaps its a problem of having to many jurisdictions involved with their layers and layers of bureaucracy ...

 

[Pushka]

Perhaps its a problem of having to many jurisdictions involved with their layers and layers of bureaucracy ...

That indeed has been and remains the root cause of many issues, from border control through to vaccine distribution.

 

[drron]

The whole of the management of health is tied up with multiple layers of bureaucracy in Australia.At the height of the tasmanian outbreak I had to get approval from 3 people to do a rapid covid test on a new admission with respiratory symptoms who was placed in a bed alongside a person scheduled for surgery in 6 hours time.

And if you want to see some of the problems search for the Morris Inquiry into Bundaberg hospital which ran in 2005.It has been incorporated in the Commonwealth Hansard.But a brief overview.

Deposed Head of Australian Inquiry Ties Surgeon to 13 Deaths (Published 2005)

Australian Parliament receives report on inquiry into activities of American-trained surgeon Jayant Patel at rural Australian hospital, saying Patel was responsible for deaths of 13 patients; says he did unnecessary operations, removed healthy organs and revealed 'lack of up-to-date knowledge,'...

www.nytimes.com

He cross examined the QLD Director General of Health himself who had to admit 60% of his wage costs were on Non Clinical staff.As Mr. Morris said if that 60% could be reduced to 20% then he could double the number of doctors,double the number of nurses,double the number of physios and many more.
Things have not improved since 2005.

 

[dajop]

He cross examined the QLD Director General of Health himself who had to admit 60% of his wage costs were on Non Clinical staff.As Mr. Morris said if that 60% could be reduced to 20% then he could double the number of doctors,double the number of nurses,double the number of physios and many more.

Sorry for going way OT, but too lighten up the thread I feel a couple of Jim Hacker videos are really quite relevant ...

 

[Seat0B]

Seat0B
I’m with @hb13 on this one @dajop. There should be no impediment to an Australian citizen being in Australia for any reason at all, or no reason, or a reason that they don’t have to declare to anyone, or just because they feel like it, as often as they want to. And if that normal right of citizenship were to be allowed to all citizens, then the fact that you might make 3 visits here in 12-18 month period (which is absolutely your right as a citizen) would not preclude any other citizen from getting home.

As the quote goes: "Up to a point, Lord Copper!"

As one person posted earlier, they are certain that if several AFFers had come together early last year - this whole mess/disgrace would have been solved. I agree 100%.

Here is one possible re-working of the NZ system (which I have not found a detailed explanation of how exactly they prioritise) - to solve this for Australia.

_________________________​

If an Australian citizen or permanent resident is normally living in Australia & lodging an Australian tax return (or retired & no longer required to lodge one due to income level etc) - then yes they should be home yesterday. Early on, the number of such people could have all been brought back in ten days if the HQ capacity had been dedicated solely to this component. Or within a month if just 1/3rd of the HQ capacity was allocated.

_______________________________
​

Eg: People given clearance to exit to visit ill/dying relative or clear up affairs of deceased close relative - priority = top.

It seems incredible to have to type the following (in the 21st not 17th century):

Eg: Australians stranded overseas having been on a (pure, non working) holiday - priority = top. I wonder just how many 'diplomatic staff' who are based in the exact same countries have been back & forth to Australia since these 'tourists' were stranded. I am led to believe (but have not verified) that these public servants have been back at least once (many several times) since last March whilst 'stranded vulnerable Australians' in the same countries remain stranded. I am not talking about the ambassadors, consuls etc but 'staff & their families'.

Not to mention certain ex-Fed MPs flying overseas & back on Govt aircraft with the rest of the seats empty whilst there were/are 'vulnerable Australians' left behind.

______________________________​

If they have never lodged an Australian tax return then that is a different matter & my (harsh) priority would be just in front of foreign nationals (celebrity/connected person/rich person/tourist).

If they have previously lodged tax retruns but not lived in Australia for more than 5 years - then priority ahead of those directly above.

The reality is & was starkly different.

Initially 70% of Australian citizens registered with DFAT were in (descending order from decining memory) India, South Africa, Vietnam & The Philipines. Most are/were dual-Nationals. In June last year there were 3 chartered plane loads 100% full of people into Melbourne from Nepal (for example) with more than half not being Australian citizens/permanent residents.

I agree with you too up to a point @RAM (see what I did there ), but even "dual national" can be a complex situation. Eg my son was born in the USA whilst we were on a military posting there, thus granting him US citizenship as well as Australian. However, he lived in Australia until he started working after university, first for UN and later for global law firms overseas. He has never lived in the USA since we returned to Australia at the end of our posting. He has paid tax in Australia, but given the way things work out, he has also paid tax in the USA (and the UK and the Netherlands at various points as well in his career - he does get around - or he used to before COVID ). He currently resides in the UAE. Even though on paper he is a "dual national", he is really an Australian, and regards himself as an Australian. He just happens by dint of birth circumstances to have another passport as well.

Acknowledgement: I have truncated your initial post to fit the space and address the comments for me - hopefully I have not misrepresented you by doing that.