I don't think 'discouraging' people from taking holidays abroad will work, do you?

[Tuesdaysintheazores]

If the government lift restrictions on holidays abroad people will go on them. They're either allowed or they're not, I don't think the government can discourage people can they?

I very much disagree with this. The public has on the whole behaved exactly as required. Public adherence to lockdown restrictions has been far higher than expected. The research showed when people didn't adhere it was most likely to be because they felt unable to due to financial need.

Thousands volunteered to support various initiatives, far more than could be utilized. We have all these vaccines because thousands of people volunteered for trials, medical staff volunteered to be redeployed to covid wards, school staff gave up leave to look after keyworker children, people have been phenomenal.

Wonderstuff I couldn’t agree more. I very much disagree with the whole pandemic has shown we’re selfish trope. The opposite in fact.

@PicsInRed

People I've watched jet abroad the past 12 months:

Stanley Johnson
Carrie Symonds
Influencers (to "work" in Dubai)
Charles and Camilla
Aussie cricket players
Americas Cup sailors
...and pretty much any half pro sports person
Actors
Musicians
Even Captain Sir Tom Moore

Yes I'll be taking a fucking hol abroad. Multiple in fact.

Yes, and while they’ve been doing this I’ve been unable to see my parents abroad who have been ill. If the ban is lifted I’ll be on that plane, whatever I am ‘encouraged’ or ‘discouraged’ to do. And I’m far from selfish. I, like most others, have made huge sacrifices this year. So anyone saying it’s selfish to fly abroad once it’s permitted can basically piss off.

Exactly @PicsInRed, seems that during a pandemic you can travel abroad if you're rich or a "celebrity". But yeah sure , everything is because we plebs are selfish.

Government doesn't want people to travel, government puts effective measures in place.

@MrsHastingslikethebattle

Its the governments way of not taking any of the blame.

Like last summer, people are discouraged from going to the beach, so people went and if course it wasnt the governments fault.

I'm fully vaccinated and I will be off like a shot abroad given the chance.

Yeah if you're fully vaccinated, why shouldn't you go? If you're prepared to do tests and quarantine too. Why should you not go ? We don't know enough about variants yet to see if that's actually going to be a massive problem. With safeguards in place like testing etc and social distancing, why should we continue to put our lives on hold ? We've rolled up our sleeves and taken that risk, now let me get the fuck on with my life.

@Covidatemyhomework

[pedant]

I think I’m in the minority but i truly think that international travel should continue to be banned this year.

International travel isn't banned, travel overseas for holidays is.

[/pedant]

No, I don’t think it will. I shan’t though- not remotely tempted!

@loginfail yes you're absolutely right to highlight that distinction.I think a major part of the issue is that many are pushing that distinction to the uppermost limit.

For example Charles and Camilla would have set a much better example by not going to Greece, but doesn't seem to have crossed their minds not to go.

‘Discouragement’ may work if it’s in the form of rules that make travelling very inconvenient, such as numerous tests, quarantine, the costs that come with that etc. That would probably reduce the number of ‘unnecessary’ (I don’t like that term but can’t think of a better one) holidays, but it would still allow those who are desperate to see family abroad to travel. Which is very important.

Plus, I don’t think there is a way to stop variants crossing borders, we’ve seen it happen everywhere, so you might as well allow a degree of travel.

@TheClaws I don’t think I worded it well, because of course people should have self-responsibility and comply with the quarantine regardless. What I meant was, no one was actually checking last summer, so people didn’t bother isolating. Right now you get multiple phone calls and your paperwork is thoroughly checked at the airport, so it does put people off breaking self-isolation.

The government blamed it on ‘holidaymakers in Spain’ when it was actually their inability to set up a proper system that caused most of the chaos. Let’s remember that back in summer 2020 you didn’t even need a test to travel to certain countries, most definitely not to get back to the UK. You could be positive but no one checked that before you got on the plane. No one checked your forms at the airport. It took them almost a year to put measures in place and start checking people were testing and quarantining.

To the PP who gave that list of rich and privileged people who’ve kept jetting abroad this year, it is not fair to include athletes and artists on it. There’s a difference between influencers and C&C going off on a jolly to Dubai and Greece, and people whose jobs are in sports, arts, music, who need to travel for work. I’m in one of the latter groups and I haven’t been ‘jetting abroad’ for the fun of it. I’ve been doing it so I can keep paying my bills, and international travel for work purposes has always been allowed. Being an athlete or a musician isn’t a hobby, it’s actually a job for some people.

I agree to a point @Schulte, but frankly making travel more expensive through testing etc. means it primarily becomes for the rich only. Maybe instead, they need to restrict overall numbers and put a fixed price on testing.

@EileenGC you're totally right. I travelled in October and didn't need to do a test before leaving. I could have been positive on the plane or could have been sitting next to positive people.

My mum travelled to the UK in Augusta last year and didn't need to do a test and didn't need to quarantine, as the country she came from was on the travel corridor green just at that time.

You cannot compare that to the situation now. There's no country you can travel to or from, where you don't require at least a negative test. They check everything too. A negative test is not fail proof, we all know that. But at the moment they check paperwork very carefully and they call you / turn up at your house during quarantine and you have to pre-book the two tests during your quarantine. So it's really very very different to last year...

Makes a change from threads of yore when folk buying choccies in their essential shop were accused of killing their grannies. I suspect the tests both going and on the way back will be a deterrent for many. At current prices, a family of 4 would be looking at around a grand extra for the privilege. But if the current weather is any indication of this summer it might well be a price worth paying.

All the "what ifs" have led us to changing our flights to 2022 (boo).

But surely concerning the arrivals hall debacle they could use different terminals for green countries and red/amber countries. And the smaller single terminal airports eould be quieter anyway.

Don't know what they can do about those coming from red countries (regularly?) on a connecting flight via a green country as mentioned by a PP but if you "have to" fly then surely you're exempt from quarantine anyway and if you're not exempt then why do you "have to" fly? Genuinely curious.

Agree, am sick of the government refusing to govern.

If it is allowed it should be fine. We don't 'advise' people not to drive at 90mph, we legislate.

Johnson needs to get off the fence. He is such a poor PM.

But surely concerning the arrivals hall debacle they could use different terminals for green countries and red/amber countries.

That's been suggested, it may be an option, but it's not as straightforward a process as some seem to think.

Apologies if this ends up TL;DR, and please don't shoot the messenger but:

Different airlines usually use different subcontractors/teams to handle things like baggage offload, passenger disembarkation, aircraft cleaning, aircraft towing - chuck all "red" flights into one terminal and you'll need all airlines to have teams their, and all the associated kit that airline and it's specific aircraft type needs, such as specific catering loading equipment, aircraft towbars/tugs etc...That's one of the reasons why historically airlines have tended to group their flights into one or maybe two Terminals at multi terminal airports, so that their support team(s) can be concentrated under one or at maximum two roofs rather than scattered across several thousand acres of real estate.

There's also the issue that if you have "red" and "green" terminals what do you do if an aircraft arrives from a "red" destination but is then scheduled out to a green "destination"?

In the real world you can't lock an aircraft into a "green only or red only schedule, you need to switch them around for umpteeen reasons e.g. because they break, need routine maintenance. A gate switch within a terminal is relatively if an airline is fixed at one terminal but if you have to go to "red/green" terminals do you have to start towing countless aircraft across airport to switch terminals or do you bus passengers across the airport..

Short version of the above is running red/amber/green only terminals isn't as simple as has been portrayed by some (certainly one or two MPs) in the press.

Segregation within a large terminal would be easier to do.

I recall a plane from Zante flying into Cardiff causing a local outbreak. Videos on the news showing tossers on the plane wandering about maskless etc. God only knows what they got up to abroad with copious quantities of alcohol - I'm betting not socially distancing. The virus spreads from person to person through social contact, and its worst in enclosed spaces. So the more we can live like hermits for a while (or banged up properly like in China) the less opportunity for virus to spread. So foreign holidays with lots of people from all over the place gathered in airports, aeroplanes etc, plus freedom of inhibition because they're on holiday leads to more social contact, leads to more infection spread. And remember, the vaccines we have are not 100%; a fully vaccinated person can still catch and spread the virus variations we know about. Countries that shut the borders and imposed very strict properly enforced quarantine for those few they did let in (Hong Kong and Bhutan had 21 days) have had fewer infections per capita. Within our borders of course it's not possible for everyone to fully isolate, essential workers have had to carry on, and I am very grateful indeed to them - they've been risking themselves and their families for me. But whilst we've beaten this horrible disease down within the uk with vaccine and lockdown, remember that covid originated in China and international travel brought it here, and not necessarily direct. We were merrily importing virus through the skiing holidays etc in early 2020. Sequencing showed we had the "Italian" and "Spanish" variants etc before we managed our own home grown "Kent" variation. Which we have managed, through travel, to export. So no non absolutely essential travel for now makes sense to me.

I think the Kent variant proves that we can all stay home and still get the variants though. The question is whether the vaccines work surely? The test and trace system which cost billions seems to be a waste of time- Proper quarantine at home and a functioning test and trace system and more planning about airports seems to be the way forwards

I think a simpler, more definitive UK wide message would really help. So no non essential travel until x% of the population has been fully vaccinated and some scientific evidence to back that up. We're within shooting distance of herd immunity so even if some weird and wonderful variant does get imported it shouldn't be a disaster, provided we're past the tipping point for herd immunity and we can identify those with the new variants fairly quickly.

@loginfail

But surely concerning the arrivals hall debacle they could use different terminals for green countries and red/amber countries.

That's been suggested, it may be an option, but it's not as straightforward a process as some seem to think.

Apologies if this ends up TL;DR, and please don't shoot the messenger but:

Different airlines usually use different subcontractors/teams to handle things like baggage offload, passenger disembarkation, aircraft cleaning, aircraft towing - chuck all "red" flights into one terminal and you'll need all airlines to have teams their, and all the associated kit that airline and it's specific aircraft type needs, such as specific catering loading equipment, aircraft towbars/tugs etc...That's one of the reasons why historically airlines have tended to group their flights into one or maybe two Terminals at multi terminal airports, so that their support team(s) can be concentrated under one or at maximum two roofs rather than scattered across several thousand acres of real estate.

There's also the issue that if you have "red" and "green" terminals what do you do if an aircraft arrives from a "red" destination but is then scheduled out to a green "destination"?

In the real world you can't lock an aircraft into a "green only or red only schedule, you need to switch them around for umpteeen reasons e.g. because they break, need routine maintenance. A gate switch within a terminal is relatively if an airline is fixed at one terminal but if you have to go to "red/green" terminals do you have to start towing countless aircraft across airport to switch terminals or do you bus passengers across the airport..

Short version of the above is running red/amber/green only terminals isn't as simple as has been portrayed by some (certainly one or two MPs) in the press.

Segregation within a large terminal would be easier to do.

Thanks for that reply. It's always interesting to hear how things work from the "inside". I can imagine it would be a logistical nightmare actually.

Do you think the airlines and airports have looked into it or was it something that could be dismissed fairly early as not workable?

@StCharlotte

Glad it made some sort of sense, I was posting in a hurry and using a smartphone..

Do you think the airlines and airports have looked into it or was it something that could be dismissed fairly early as not workable?

I'd guess segregated terminals might have been been looked at by airline/airport management just in case the lawmakers say "make it so"..

FWIW this was said recently in the context of introducing such a scheme at Heathrow:

"The idea that arrivals from red list countries could be diverted to a reopened Terminal 4 was privately dismissed by industry sources. One described it as “preposterous”, adding: “The Home Office would do well to take a crash course in airport operations before making suggestions.”

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/apr/20/ministers-urge-heathrow-to-dedicate-terminal-red-list-arrivals-coronavirus

“The Home Office would do well to take a crash course in airport operations before making suggestions.”

Exactly. People give advice on things they know nothing about.

If it's ok for Stanley Johnson, then it's ok for me.

If it's permitted to go abroad on holiday I will, and I will do whatever is required re tests etc. What I won't do is sit at home because I'm encouraged to do so while Stanley suns himself in Greece.

@6Helen7 but Stanley Johnson will be able to go when many of us can't- in fact I think he can go now - by virtue of having a second property abroad, which is a nice little loophole so that the rich can continue to travel.

I think the government are also discouraging people from booking because when the holiday is cancelled (because of a new variant/rise in CV-19 cases at destination or whatever) then, even though it isn't the fault of the UK government, they will be under pressure from the public to refund all the people that booked against advice knowing they were not able to get insurance for cancellation.
All those with cancelled holidays will then say 'they didn't tell us we wouldn't be covered for cancellation' or 'they didn't tell us there was a possibility of a new variant'
etc

Rookiemere damn, I'd forgotten about the loophole (specially created for Stanley no doubt). That news has put me off my lunch!