Don't forget that there is a large sector of UK based tourism that rely on overseas holidays.While I’d like to see both tests removed, if we’re only removing one I think we chose the wrong one.
The ‘day 2’ test is a deterrent to inbound tourism for the same reason that the pre departure test is a deterrent for outbound tourism; if we’re keeping a measure, I’d argue it’s better for it to be the one that doesn’t harm the U.K. economy as much.
They did remove the need to self-isolate whilst awaiting the day 2 test result, at least.While I’d like to see both tests removed, if we’re only removing one I think we chose the wrong one.
The ‘day 2’ test is a deterrent to inbound tourism for the same reason that the pre departure test is a deterrent for outbound tourism; if we’re keeping a measure, I’d argue it’s better for it to be the one that doesn’t harm the U.K. economy as much.
They did remove the need to self-isolate whilst awaiting the day 2 test result, at least.
The test to return was making me disinclined to travel out of the CTA owing to the consequent mess if I tested positive there. I can get over testing positive on the day 2.
They did remove the need to self-isolate whilst awaiting the day 2 test result, at least.
Although tests after arrival in the UK, seem to be easier and cheaper than pre-departures in other Countries !While I’d like to see both tests removed, if we’re only removing one I think we chose the wrong one.
The ‘day 2’ test is a deterrent to inbound tourism for the same reason that the pre departure test is a deterrent for outbound tourism; if we’re keeping a measure, I’d argue it’s better for it to be the one that doesn’t harm the U.K. economy as much.
For what it's worth, the current (soon ending) regulations permit someone self-isolating pending the result of a day 2 test to go out to obtain basic necessities for the household if they cannot practicably obtain them any other way. (Interpretations admittedly vary.)Yes, that is good - for the most basic reasons. Obviously you can order food online, but it makes things easier being able to go out to the supermarket at any time.
People who have not had a booster jab will be denied entry to large venues and the right to quarantine-free international travel under plans being considered by ministers.
Nowhere soon, unless you've had a booster.
Covid booster jab refuseniks face being denied access to large venues
People who have not had a booster jab will be denied entry to large venues and the right to quarantine-free international travelwww.thetimes.co.uk
Not really. You can still travel. But from what I understand, you'll have to quarantine for 10 days on arrival back in the UK.
So if you've had the two initial doses and then actually had Covid, does two doses plus natural immunity not count for anything?
I am not against the booster, but I am just questioning this policy given that, by the time these plans have been implemented (spring/summer?), many of us will have natural immunity anyway via catching Omicron, I suspect.
(Haven't had the booster yet but not for ideological reasons, just because I am currently temporarily out of the UK and haven't had time yet).
England does not consider so-called natural immunity to have any legal value.So if you've had the two initial doses and then actually had Covid, does two doses plus natural immunity not count for anything?
I am not against the booster, but I am just questioning this policy given that, by the time these plans have been implemented (spring/summer?), many of us will have natural immunity anyway via catching Omicron, I suspect.
(Haven't had the booster yet but not for ideological reasons, just because I am currently temporarily out of the UK and haven't had time yet).
England does not consider so-called natural immunity to have any legal value.
Vaccination-related travel restrictions have never really been about what would "stop the spread" - not that this is even a necessary or desirable aim at this stage of endemicity.Which I really don't understand, and needs to be changed.
Travel insurance, no, I'm not aware of any policies that would cover cancellation costs in the event of further restrictions or FCO advice against travel. The risk of further restrictions is so high that, if you did find an insurer willing to take it on, you would probably be paying a premium nearly as high as what you'd be entitled to claim!Question refund policy/rights in the event that travel advice or entry requirements change…
I’m looking at potentially going to Scandinavia in the summer. At the moment provided I return a negative LFT I’m okay to travel without quarantine. However, what if I was to book and that advice subsequently changed, either with the FCO advising against travel or my country of entry tightening controls or requiring quarantine?
Is anyone aware of whether travel insurance policies or airline refund policies will cover this scenario?
Question refund policy/rights in the event that travel advice or entry requirements change…
I’m looking at potentially going to Scandinavia in the summer. At the moment provided I return a negative LFT I’m okay to travel without quarantine. However, what if I was to book and that advice subsequently changed, either with the FCO advising against travel or my country of entry tightening controls or requiring quarantine?
Is anyone aware of whether travel insurance policies or airline refund policies will cover this scenario?
Which I really don't understand, and needs to be changed.
Vaccination-related travel restrictions have never really been about what would "stop the spread" - not that this is even a necessary or desirable aim at this stage of endemicity.
It's always been about "nudging" (i.e. indirectly forcing) people into getting vaccinated however many times is fashionable this week, so as to reduce the potential strain they could put on the NHS.
Which, arguably, is a legitimate aim - but of course it needs to be balanced against the significant resultant human rights implications. And there has clearly been little or not attempt at undertaking such a balancing exercise.
Travel insurance will usually cover you if your illness (such as COVID-19) prevents you from travel.Question refund policy/rights in the event that travel advice or entry requirements change…
I’m looking at potentially going to Scandinavia in the summer. At the moment provided I return a negative LFT I’m okay to travel without quarantine. However, what if I was to book and that advice subsequently changed, either with the FCO advising against travel or my country of entry tightening controls or requiring quarantine?
Is anyone aware of whether travel insurance policies or airline refund policies will cover this scenario?
I would agree with this advice though one would hope that by the summer, with Omicron behind us and virus levels naturally lower due to the season anyway, I would guess the chances of restrictions being harsher than now would be very low. Certainly if you have the booster jab (given the way countries are going), I would guess you would be OK.I'm also interested in this. I suspect airlines will be more strict as if people can still travel, they will still fly. I mean it's not their fault if a country was to change its policies and make fewer people eligible to travel. Only if a country totally closed up and they had to cancel flights would they be likely to refund at this stage.
I'd suggest seeking out a good travel insurance policy, one which covers such events, and making sure you take it out ASAP. That way if the rules change after you purchased the tickets and the policy, you'd be covered.
I would agree with this advice though one would hope that by the summer, with Omicron behind us and virus levels naturally lower due to the season anyway, I would guess the chances of restrictions being harsher than now would be very low. Certainly if you have the booster jab (given the way countries are going), I would guess you would be OK.
Unless some new mutation comes along which is as contagious as Omicron but more deadly, any country tightening things up between now and summer would be killing its tourist industry for no apparent purpose. Europe (including the UK) has had two very poor summer seasons already, can it afford a third without good reason?
The officer will go away later this year when the Schengen Entry-Exit System goes live; right now the different Schengen members' computers don't speak to one another so the stamps are the only way to establish whether an individual has gone over their 90 days.Back in the UK. Returned at Gatwick, and just like I returned from Spain, no PLF or proof of vaccination checks when arrived. But I did get asked for these documents when leaving Naples in Italy.
One interesting aspect is that on departure from Naples, is that you first scan your passport on the e-passport gate, and then, after that, you go through a manned passport control so that the officer then puts the exit stamp on the passport.
The officer will go away later this year when the Schengen Entry-Exit System goes live; right now the different Schengen members' computers don't speak to one another so the stamps are the only way to establish whether an individual has gone over their 90 days.
I have to confess I don't get the rationale for this 90-day thing, particularly when applied to countries with a low security risk such as the UK and many other examples around extra-Schengen Europe and the rest of the world. It seems to be going back to the days when countries (in this case, Schengen vs. the rest of the world) were constantly at war with each other and didn't trust each other.
If you spend say 100 days in a series of EU countries, you are contributing money to the economy by spending locally. You are paying local VAT. That is surely a good thing?
Is it also true that the restrictions are harsher than pre-EU days? For example, pre-EU and pre-Schengen, could you have spent 90 days in France, then 90 days in Germany, then 90 days in Switzerland etc - resulting in theoretically much more freedom than now?
Of course, regarding the UK's rights in particular, I blame 'Boris' and May more than the EU, as both 'Boris' and May insisted on an immigrant-hostile version of Brexit.
I went to Brussels on Wednesday and back the same day (on Eurostar) but I didn’t get a stamp on my British passport in either direction?
I have plenty of stamps in 2021 so maybe this is a new thing they started this year?
However, as recently as 2018, it was a toss-up as to whether you would get your non-EU passport stamped when entering Schengen at certain EU ports, notably when entering through Italy and occasionally Spain and France. US, Canadian and Australian citizens were likely to not be stamped. If exiting Schengen through a stricter country such as the Netherlands, Germany or Switzerland, this could cause problems without proof of when you entered.
I've not been abroad for three years but I have looked in to it a few times. My recollection is that summer 2020 was actually easier than 2021. Which seems very odd.It seems to me that as we approach Covid becoming endemic, governments are becoming more and more heavy-handed with things like vaccine passports, and one might question whether this is actually necessary. The mood also seems to suggest that these are not just temporary measures for Omicron/winter. The legitimate question that must logically follow, then, is "at what stage will it end?" I would think that really strong measures, like outright travel bans, will disappear by spring but vaccine passports, probably not.
There were no fusses about being double or triple vaccinated and the isolation periods to go along with that in 2020.I've not been abroad for three years but I have looked in to it a few times. My recollection is that summer 2020 was actually easier than 2021. Which seems very odd.