Predictions of when international flights may resume/bans lifted

[seanQLD]

As best I understand, the question of paying for quarantine upon return is linked to the approval of outbound travel (at least, it was for my mate). Regardless of port of entry, he (his employer) had to pay quarantine costs. He quarantined in SYD and had to pay.

As I understand it, the "quarantine for free" only applies to returned travellers (as in those who have been OS since prior to the border closures), not those first leaving Australia. YMMV, but please share if your experience is different.

It is different than you described in QLD ... As announced by QLD government, returning Australians arriving into QLD , will PAY their own expenses if they booked AFTER midnight on 17 June 2020... IF they booked their travel before then the Qld goverment will continue to pay the quarantine expenses. Their annoucment to that effect, on 17 June, is clear and precise.

 

[Gremlin]

It is different than you described in QLD ... As announced by QLD government, returning Australians arriving into QLD , will PAY their own expenses if they booked AFTER midnight on 17 June 2020... IF they booked their travel before then the Qld goverment will continue to pay the quarantine expenses. Their annoucment to that effect, on 17 June, is clear and precise.

I'd be getting that confirmed as part of the outbound application. As I said, my mate had to pay quarantine expenses even though NSW has "no 'user pays' quarantine arrangements for returning travellers". It was explained to him by Australian Border Force that he wasn't a returning traveller under that scheme, rather he was an outbound traveller from Australia. They would only provide him exemption to depart if he (his employer) paid for the quarantine associated with his return. Irrelevant when the ticket was booked or where he was returning to. But as I said, YMMV. Would be very keen to hear others who have different experiences.

 

[seanQLD]

I'd be getting that confirmed as part of the outbound application. As I said, my mate had to pay quarantine expenses even though NSW has "no 'user pays' quarantine arrangements for returning travellers". It was explained to him by Australian Border Force that he wasn't a returning traveller under that scheme, rather he was an outbound traveller from Australia. They would only provide him exemption to depart if he (his employer) paid for the quarantine associated with his return. Irrelevant when the ticket was booked or where he was returning to. But as I said, YMMV. Would be very keen to hear others who have different experiences.

What are you saying ? that he (or his employer) was hit with a bill at the departure gate (i.e. months before he would eventually return and be subject to quarantine, if that's even still the law at that time... ) ? How could they even calculate it ?

Or are you saying it is part of the "exemption to travel" paperwork... needed at least a few days before even going to the airport ??

If anyone on this forum has been approved with an exemption to travel "for essential business" .... it would be very useful if they could post copies of the actual paperwork they received. We are all going off "a mate told me" ... or "a press report" ...etc... We need more established facts, rather than guess work .

 

[DC3]

....That (existing) process does NOT match with what ScoMo is saying in that interview....

Any thoughts ?

 

[PineappleSkip]

His quarantine costs were required to be covered by his employer and he was required to have travel insurance covering COVID (which was sourced through the company's insurance broker and apparently cost more than the rest of his trip put together!

Thanks for the heads up. Client (who would pay) wants to get me back and I'll pass this on. Unfortunately they already pay a fortune for TI as all my work is in what were "do not travel" countries before the ban came in. I can confirm the premiums are eye watering. Bespoke prices from bespoke insurers.

Yes and business travel can't start until the gov says its ok to leave.

The Govt never stopped business travel that fitted the criteria for exit, which was " essential for the conduct of critical industries and business (including export and import", which wasn't a particularly high bar from what I've heard. Agree with your point re the same rules should apply to internationsl students though.

If anyone on this forum has been approved with an exemption to travel "for essential business" .... it would be very useful if they could post copies of the actual paperwork they received.

there is an article on Executive Traveller whose comments include the details a lot of experiences of getting approval to travel out. Not going to bother looking it up, but from what I've seen it wouldn't surprise me if posting copies of paperwork was a crime. They have morphed from keeping people out to keeping people in, with the same sort of no information, no guidelines, no right of review, etc.

Cheers skip

 

[Melburnian1]

...there is an article on Executive Traveller whose comments include the details a lot of experiences of getting approval to travel out. Not going to bother looking it up, but from what I've seen it wouldn't surprise me if posting copies of paperwork was a crime. They have morphed from keeping people out to keeping people in, with the same sort of no information, no guidelines, no right of review, etc.

It may not always give the desired result, and may on occasion be slower than required, but one can always complain to a Federal MP or Senator.

 

[seanQLD]

Thanks for the heads up. Client (who would pay) wants to get me back and I'll pass this on. Unfortunately they already pay a fortune for TI as all my work is in what were "do not travel" countries before the ban came in. I can confirm the premiums are eye watering. Bespoke prices from bespoke insurers.


The Govt never stopped business travel that fitted the criteria for exit, which was " essential for the conduct of critical industries and business (including export and import", which wasn't a particularly high bar from what I've heard. Agree with your point re the same rules should apply to internationsl students though.



there is an article on Executive Traveller whose comments include the details a lot of experiences of getting approval to travel out. Not going to bother looking it up, but from what I've seen it wouldn't surprise me if posting copies of paperwork was a crime. They have morphed from keeping people out to keeping people in, with the same sort of no information, no guidelines, no right of review, etc.

Cheers skip

Thanks for your reply !

Of course 2 added problems... even if an exemption is granted..... are (1) 95% of the flights are just not flying and (2) there may be problems entering the destination country, including guarded quarantine there...

 

[Gremlin]

What are you saying ? that he (or his employer) was hit with a bill at the departure gate (i.e. months before he would eventually return and be subject to quarantine, if that's even still the law at that time... ) ? How could they even calculate it ?

Or are you saying it is part of the "exemption to travel" paperwork... needed at least a few days before even going to the airport ??

If anyone on this forum has been approved with an exemption to travel "for essential business" .... it would be very useful if they could post copies of the actual paperwork they received. We are all going off "a mate told me" ... or "a press report" ...etc... We need more established facts, rather than guess work .

He submitted his "exemption to travel" paperwork to ABF. He received a conditional approval subject to:

a) Demonstrating suitable travel insurance including cover for COVID into 'Do Not Travel' destinations (which is everywhere); and
b) Payment of Australian quarantine expenses.

Payment was required before they would finalise his approval.

In his case, it was hardly "months before he would eventually return". He had three days of business meetings, plus two week quarantine at destination before arriving back in the country (for another 2 weeks quarantine).

As I said, YMMV. Please advise if so...

 

[Melburnian1]

He submitted his "exemption to travel" paperwork to ABF. He received a conditional approval subject to:

a) Demonstrating suitable travel insurance including cover for COVID into 'Do Not Travel' destinations (which is everywhere); and
b) Payment of Australian quarantine expenses.

What business of our govts is it as to whether or not we have travel insurance?

I always do, but surekly this is a matter for individuals given we're travelling to foreign jurisdictions?

 

[seanQLD]

in COVID ... everything is government's business ! BTW I 100% agree with you that it shoulkd not be ., But they take so many personal freedoms at this time "for the common good". Hopefully those reasonable freedoms will be returned at some point in future

 

[Gremlin]

What business of our govts is it as to whether or not we have travel insurance?

I always do, but surekly this is a matter for individuals given we're travelling to foreign jurisdictions?

Speculation on my part, but I'm aware that the Australian embassies overseas have been supporting a LOT of travellers whose travel insurance has been found insufficient or non-existent. That support has come at the cost of other activities. I posted in another thread that a friend at DFAT had mentioned that they were ramping up consular support and having to scale back other activities as a result. In other words, at the time when Australian trade is experiencing its biggest upheaval since the Second World War, DFAT is scaling back the amount of support it is giving to trade in order to provide further consular services. My guess is that this was about not adding to that consular load.

 

[jase05]

What business of our govts is it as to whether or not we have travel insurance?

I always do, but surekly this is a matter for individuals given we're travelling to foreign jurisdictions?

Because if you got into trouble overseas I would bet you would want our embassy to help you.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I do not understand any exemption for business travel. While I support a state's right to close borders, I'd want to look at all legal angles to see if one class of citizen can be allowed to leave while others can't. It should be the same rules for all.

 

[drron]

Yes the Project had another epidemiologist and virus expert on last night who said the State borders should be open to everyone.
But obviously anyone from the hotspots in lockdown shouldn't be moving around so fair that they be looked for and sent back +/- a fine.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yes the Project had another epidemiologist and virus expert on last night who said the State borders should be open to everyone.
But obviously anyone from the hotspots in lockdown shouldn't be moving around so fair that they be looked for and sent back +/- a fine.

Good heavens! Since when is an epidemiologist an expert in law? Or public policy? They may be a subject matter expert, but can they see the bigger picture?

 

[p--and--t]

Good heavens! Since when is an epidemiologist an expert in law? Or public policy? They may be a subject matter expert, but can they see the bigger picture?

The company I used to work for stopped hiring/promoting Engineers as people managers (and budgets) for the same reason. You can be great at your field of study, but cough at others.

 

[drron]

Good heavens! Since when is an epidemiologist an expert in law? Or public policy? They may be a subject matter expert, but can they see the bigger picture?

When the law is supposedly based on a public health emergency due to a viral pandemic they certainly are the experts.According to Section 92 of the Constitution the State borders should remain open.Case law has established that public health emergencies MAY over ride that section.
So who do you think are the experts that can decide when state borders are closed?

 

[dajop]

So who do you think are the experts that can decide when state borders are closed?

Politicians

Comeon, drron, it is 2020. The only expertise that counts is the opinion of some random people on facebook and twitter, preferably without having studied the topic they are commenting on.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

When the law is supposedly based on a public health emergency due to a viral pandemic they certainly are the experts.According to Section 92 of the Constitution the State borders should remain open.Case law has established that public health emergencies MAY over ride that section.
So who do you think are the experts that can decide when state borders are closed?

The folk who make the laws. If there is a question around the legality of those laws that is determined by the courts. And of course the law makers are answerable to parliament and the people.

I don't think an epidemiologist on The Project falls into any of those categories (a lawmaker, member of the judiciary, or representing the entire electorate).

 

[drron]

So what you are saying is that the States should have appealed to the High Court to close their borders as the constitution says they should remain open to all Australian citizens.I would agree with that.
Your statement that i replied to was this.

I do not understand any exemption for business travel. While I support a state's right to close borders, I'd want to look at all legal angles to see if one class of citizen can be allowed to leave while others can't. It should be the same rules for all.

So what evidence do the State Premiers quote when defending the border closures- expert health advice.So an epidemiologist is such an expert.
And once again the advice of the Commonwealth,NSW and Victorian health officials has been don't close the State borders.

Besides the matter is with the High court and will be decided on both the law and the health evidence.