quarantena al rientro da viaggi intra UE


13900

Utente Registrato
26 Aprile 2012
7,018
1,602
Sono usciti i primi dettagli della nuova "roadmap" del governo inglese ed è praticamente ciò che mi aspettavo: un pastrocchio senza senso ideato da un gruppo di minus habens. Qui il commento di Robert Boyle, in cui forse c'è solo un errore (quello del test pre-partenza, per cui parrebbe che valgano ancora le regole attuali).

Per inciso, questi sono gli stessi fenomeni che hanno istituito, dal 6 aprile, l'obbligo per gli assistenti di volo di fare test (con lateral flow) dopo un viaggio ai giorni 2, 5, 8 malgrado gli AAVV volino in media ogni 3-4 gg. E ancor oggi non ci sono i test in aeroporto, per cui devi andarli a cercare in giro.

UK government deals another blow to the travel industry

Reopening international travel from the UK
Airlines and other travel industry players have been anxiously waiting for the UK government to pronounce on when and how the current ban on non-essential international travel might be lifted. When the roadmap for relaxing restrictions was published on February 22, the issue of overseas travel was firmly dodged, with the can kicked down the road to April 12. That was the date set for the grandiosely named “Global Travel Taskforce” to report on how international travel could be safely restarted.
On Monday, we got some strong hints from the government that when the Taskforce reported, the news wasn’t going to be what the travel industry had been hoping for. I wrote about it here.
This morning, we got another announcement from the government. On the face of it, it was the long-awaited report from the Taskforce, delivered three days early. The reality was a bit different, as I will explain. I’ll start with the big questions that people want answered.
When will we be able to go on holiday and where can we go?
What every one wants to know is whether the travel ban will be lifted on May 17, and if so, which countries will be open for travel. The truth is that we still don’t know the answers to either question. We’ve been told that countries will be put into red/amber/green categories based on risk. But once again, the government has refused to answer any of the key questions, saying only that it will do so by “early May”:
“We will set out by early May which countries will fall into which category, as well as confirming whether international travel can resume from 17 May.”
Both airlines and customers are desperately seeking some guidance, around which they can plan. Today’s announcement just gave them another month of uncertainty.
But that was actually not the biggest issue with what got announced today.
Death by testing
The biggest shocker in this announcement was that even for low-risk “green routes”, arriving passengers will need to take both a pre-departure test and a post-arrival test. Both of these need to be PCR tests, which typically cost £120 each. Even if the destination country does not require any tests on the outbound journey, that’s £240 per passenger in test costs. That will push travel out of the reach of all but the most affluent travellers.
Travellers to “amber” destinations will need three tests and to self-isolate on their return to the UK. Just the self-isolation part was enough to squash demand last summer. Adding a £360 financial hurdle on top will essentially kill it.
Airlines have been pushing for the use of much cheaper and more convenient lateral flow tests (available for £33 from BA, for example). It is a massive blow to the industry that the government have insisted on the most expensive option, PCR.
Correction: it appears that the pre-departure test doesn’t need to be a PCR test, making things slightly more affordable, but not much.
The UK government has done very little to support the travel industry during the crisis. Funding the tests it is requiring travellers to take would have been a non-discriminatory way to help the industry. This is a massive missed opportunity, in my opinion.
What happened to vaccine passports?
Another thing that was “missing in action” in this announcements was vaccine passports. Sorry, I should have said “COVID status certificates”. Everyone thought that being vaccinated would allow you to skip at least some of the testing and self-isolation requirements for travel. International travel is the least politically sensitive application of such certificates. Their absence from the framework announced today will be another source of frustration for airlines.
Could all of this change?
A date of June 28 has been set for the first review of these restrictions. Even if this review results in a further relaxation, that presumably wouldn’t come into effect until a week or two later. I guess that does leave open the hope that things will be relaxed in time to catch the end of the summer travel period.
If that doesn’t happen, missing another summer will push many travel companies under without additional financial support from the government. There seems no sign of that.
Mismatch between the rhetoric and the substance
The final issue which will infuriate the industry is the total mismatch between the substance of what has been announced and the rhetoric used in the announcement.
This is what Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said in the press release:
“International travel is vital – it boosts businesses and underpins the UK economy – but more than that, it brings people together, connects families who have been kept apart, and allows us to explore new horizons.
“The framework announced today will help allow us to reopen travel safely and sustainably, ensure we protect our hard-won achievements on the vaccine roll out and offer peace of mind to both passengers and industry as we begin to take trips abroad once again.”
And we also had this:
“The report, produced by the Global Travel Taskforce, shows how international travel could resume from 17 May at the earliest in an accessible and affordable way.”
Accessible and affordable? What planet are they on?
Judging by the substance of what has been announced, they should have said:
“We don’t want international travel to restart until much later in the year. Probably 2022. We are prioritising getting back to normal life domestically and are taking a highly risk-averse approach to avoiding importing cases or new variants. We don’t care what damage that does to the travel industry, that is not our priority. Anyone that insists on travelling should be forced to jump through many hoops and pay a high financial price. They should be staying in the UK anyway.”
It is interesting to contrast the UK and the Australian approach. Australia has been crystal clear from early on that they didn’t want international travel until 2022 and never tried to fudge the issue. Customers were clear on the rules and airlines like Qantas were able to plan and to engage with government about financial support to ensure that the industry could survive a prolonged government-imposed shutdown.
It seems to me that the UK government has fallen completely between two stools. It says it wants to reopen international travel whilst all its actions say the opposite.
Both frustrated travellers and an increasingly desperate travel industry deserve better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eugeniod1995

eugeniod1995

Utente Registrato
7 Settembre 2009
1,725
28
EDI/PSR
Come uccidere il turismo inbound e dare il contentino alle compagnie aeree, facendo andare ogni persona al massimo 1-2 volte all’anno in vacanza, con prezzi alle stelle nelle poche destinazioni green.
 

Seaking

Moderatore
Utente Registrato
1 Febbraio 2012
10,868
136
Enzomatto (nomen omen), giusto per chiarire ciò che in realtà è chiaro a tutti gli altri:

Quando TW843 ha scritto “pallottola” si riferiva ad un suo post precedente e relativo ai metodi diversamente democratici cinesi.

A botte di pallottole nella nuca siamo capaci tutti.
Il messaggio quindi non era riferito a te, puoi serenamente ritirare i tuoi propositi belligeranti.

E già che ci sei datti anche una calmata, avvertimento amichevole della moderazione.
 
Ultima modifica:

enzomatto

Utente Registrato
20 Giugno 2018
269
39
Enzomatto (nomen omen), giusto per chiarire ciò che in realtà è chiaro a tutti gli altri:

Quando TW843 ha scritto “pallottola” si riferiva ad un suo post precedente e relativo ai metodi diversamente democratici cinesi.



Il messaggio quindi non era riferito a te, puoi serenamente ritirare i tuoi propositi belligeranti.

E già che ci sei datti anche una calmata, avvertimento amichevole della moderazione.
Bella questa, io una calmata. E TW che percula ogni 3x2 no? Ah già, è della gang vostra lui
 
  • Like
Reactions: magick