Jump to content

Travel during the continuing PANDEMIC


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservative-mps-free-to-travel-internationally-liberal-ndp-mps-must-stay-home-1.5709800

 

Conservative MPs free to travel internationally, Liberal, NDP MPs must stay home

 

But Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole's officesaid there is no international travel ban in place and the advisory is meant only to help those who are vaccinated make informed decisions about their travel plans.

"This applies to MPs and all Canadians," O'Toole's communications director, Josie Sabatino, said in a statement. "As such, members of the Conservative caucus can continue to travel internationally."

 

OTool later recanted on letting Conservative MP’s travel for political reasons and and of course it was the right thing to do.  Leaders need to set examples.  That does not change the fact that he was right.  Trudeau never had the stones to bring in a ban.  He has played games. He has resorted to travel shaming and rules that make travel difficult instead.

The Travel “Recommendation” was dropped in the fall.  People started booking travel and bought insurance they thought would cover them if the boarder closed.  Trudeau brought back an advisory in mid December. An advisory that would not trigger an insurance payout.

-Canadian to Resort. I can’t come down we have a travel advisory.  

- Resort to Canadian.  We have no restrictions at this end and you are beyond our cancellation policy.

- Canadian to insurance.  I can’t travel because of Covid and the resort won’t refund.  I need to make a claim.

- Insurance Company to Canadian.  It’s only an advisory.  That means your choice.  It you choose not to travel it’s on you.

-Canadian decides to travel as a result of the limbo Trudeau’s games put them in.  It is after all an advisory which means it is their choice.  They decide. ( A decision they have every right to make)  I’m triple vaxxed.  I think I’m safe and not a threat on return.

- Canadian population Celebrates as that person has difficulty returning to Canada because the gamesmanship disincentive rules can’t be complied with.

We are such a sweet bunch of people.  And how are we letting the blame fall on Canadians who are actually following the rules. There is no ban. Yet the leader who could have changed the rules, rather than play games, gets off the hook?

It is the same travel disincentive gamesmanship that is getting Canadians stuck all over the world with positive PCR tests.

Despite what Trudeau or the press wants people to believe.  There is no ban on travel.  Trudeau did not have the stones to do it.  Canadians have every right to travel.  
 

For full disclosure I have not travelled in 2 years.  The disincentives have worked on me.  They make it too much of a hassle IMO.
 

BUT I know full well I have every right to travel if I wanted to.  I also have no issue with people who choose to go through the hassle of travel.  It’s their choice.  The rules say so.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

It is the same travel disincentive gamesmanship that is getting Canadians stuck all over the world with positive PCR tests.

A positive PCR test is a good thing, you don't need to have a negative test to come into the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, mo32a said:

A positive PCR test is a good thing, you don't need to have a negative test to come into the country.

Yes & no. I just went through this when I went down to FLL to pick up an airplane on January 15th. I got COVID for Christmas from a family member and got the PSR test done on December 31st just before the Ontario government shut that down. I was able to travel with proof of vaccination and a positive PSR test result (with a letter from a medical professional attesting to the positive result and that I was now cleared to travel) provided the test result was at least 10 days old and no older than 90 days for entry into the USA. To return to Canada, the positive result had to be within 10 to 180 days old. So getting a positive PSR just before trying to return to Canada isn't helpful at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible to continue testing positive for several months after the virus has cleared. The problem now is it's all but impossible to get a PCR test unless you're considered at risk or a health care worker. So without that positive test result, you cannot show said proof at the border. So with the feds continuing to require a molecular test result within 72 hours of returning to Canada, there will inevitably be people who will receive their first positive test on the way home and well after their virus has cleared and they're no longer contagious. But they'll still be barred from returning for 10 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Former N.L. premier suing federal government over vaccine mandates for air travel

'I've come to the conclusion now that I must, and as a Canadian, as one of the writers, founders of the Constitution Act of 1982, not only speak about it, I must act about it'

Brian-Peckford-1.png?quality=90&strip=al

Tue Feb 01, 2022 - National Post
by Tyler Dawson

Quote

 Peckford fears the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine and “objects to the use of such products in exercise of his conscience, bodily autonomy, life, liberty, and security of the person, and believes that having to disclose his vaccination status to the Respondents as a condition of boarding an airplane is a violation of his privacy.”

Brian Peckford, the last surviving premier involved in the drafting of the Canadian constitution, is suing the federal government, claiming vaccine mandates for air travel are unconstitutional.

In documents lawyers say have been filed with the Federal Court, Peckford and five others claim the mandate “effectively bans Canadians who have chosen not to receive an experimental medical treatment from domestic and international travel by airplane.”

The COVID-19 vaccines are not experimental. They have been fully approved by Health Canada.

Since October, Transport Canada rules have required those seeking to travel by air to be fully immunized against COVID-19 if they’re older than 12 years and four months, although there are exemptions for those who live in some remote communities or require urgent travel, and for essential medical treatment and religious beliefs.

“Requiring travellers and employees to be vaccinated, ensures that everyone who travels and works in the transportation industry will protect each other and keep Canadians safe,” said Transport Minister Omar Alghabra at the time.

None of the six people involved in the lawsuit have been vaccinated, according to court filings.

The applicants are represented by Keith Wilson, a St. Albert, Alta., lawyer and by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, a right-wing legal advocacy group that has been fighting COVID-19 restrictions in courts across the country. Most infamously, it was embroiled in a scandal after John Carpay, the group’s president, admitted to hiring a private investigator to follow a Manitoba judge who was hearing one of the group’s court challenges.

Peckford was premier of Newfoundland and Labrador between 1979 and 1989. Over the course of the pandemic, he has emerged as an anti-public-health-measures activist, claiming in letters to various health officials that such policies violate the charter, and parroting conspiracy theories and anti-vaccine talking points on his blog.

“I’ve come to the conclusion now that I must, and as a Canadian, as one of the writers, founders of the Constitution Act of 1982, not only speak about it, I must act about it,” Peckford told psychologist Jordan Peterson on a recent podcast, discussing the lawsuit.

Peckford lives on Vancouver Island and, according to the legal documents, requires air travel to visit family in Ontario, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia because “travelling by car across the country is impractical and dangerous depending on weather conditions” and he “does not have the financial means to travel across Canada in a private chartered aircraft.”

The lawsuit says Peckford fears the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine — the vast majority of which are mild, according to Health Canada — and “objects to the use of such products in exercise of his conscience, bodily autonomy, life, liberty, and security of the person, and believes that having to disclose his vaccination status to the Respondents as a condition of boarding an airplane is a violation of his privacy.”

“We Canadians have learned some hard lessons, and we’re not going to let our democracy fall down,” Peckford told a crowd in Victoria, B.C., over the weekend.

The others involved in the lawsuit all raise similar objections, and also raise concerns (not borne out by the medical research) about the impact of COVID-19 vaccines on health. All the applicants claim to have been “segregated from vaccinated Canadian air travellers, which renders (them) a second-class citizen.”

The lawsuit argues Transport Canada’s rule regarding vaccination is invalid because it “was made for an improper purpose, and in bad faith in furtherance of an ulterior motive to pressure Canadians into taking the COVID-19 vaccines.”

In short, Wilson argued, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s mandate letter to Alghabra made mention of enforcing such a mandate, and “his hateful comments of calling anyone who believes that people should have a choice with respect to vaccines as being racist, misogynists” are evidence that the measure was improperly developed and implemented.

“That will be the core evidence before the court,” said Wilson.

The suit also argues the vaccine travel mandate violates privacy rights, equality rights, mobility rights, rights to “life, liberty and security of the person” and freedom of religion and conscience. These are all rights protected by the charter and all can be limited by government with sufficient justification.

“This deprivation is more than trivial. The (decision) restricts unvaccinated Canadians from air travel, creating a serious harmful effect that negatively impacts liberty and security of the person,” the lawsuit claims.

Eric Adams, a law professor at the University of Alberta, said numerous lawsuits against COVID-19 measures have failed to overturn public-health restrictions, and this case raises many of the same issues.

“It’s always going to be difficult to win a case for you where you’re bringing out arguments that have already failed in similar context,” Adams said. “But at some point, perhaps the pandemic’s duration becomes a variable that becomes a factor in one of these lawsuits.”

Wilson said many of the cases that had come before the court were done on tight time schedules, with less well-developed scientific evidence and a “factual change in the risk profile of the pandemic.”

“We’re building a different case than any case that’s been put before the courts to date,” Wilson said.

Transport Canada did not respond to a request for comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2022 at 11:45 AM, J.O. said:

It's possible to continue testing positive for several months after the virus has cleared. The problem now is it's all but impossible to get a PCR test unless you're considered at risk or a health care worker. So without that positive test result, you cannot show said proof at the border. So with the feds continuing to require a molecular test result within 72 hours of returning to Canada, there will inevitably be people who will receive their first positive test on the way home and well after their virus has cleared and they're no longer contagious. But they'll still be barred from returning for 10 days.

So what you do is get the negative rapid test in Canada and go to the US. On the first day of your two week vacation, get a free PCR test. We are assuming this traveller had Covid in the past so a positive result is generated. Now that traveller can return to Canada at the end of vacation.....no worries!!

And....if they travel frequently cross-border, have your local MD provide a certificate of health and your positive pcr is good for the season....a "quasi-passport".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you been successful in acquiring rapid tests? They're very hard to find on the marketplace and if you're in BC (and maybe some other provinces as well), it's now nearly impossible to get them from public health.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, J.O. said:

Have you been successful in acquiring rapid tests? They're very hard to find on the marketplace and if you're in BC (and maybe some other provinces as well), it's now nearly impossible to get them from public health.

JO....touch wood but no issues...so far. We most recently got our rapid tests at our local Shoppers in Ontario..$40 each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mo32a said:

Sleepy Joe is sending me 4 rapid tests for free.

I tried for that "just because"....but my address was identified as a business address (marina) so no joy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Tango Foxtrot said:

 

UpperDeck

I think I speak for everyone here when I say we are very happy to see that you are finally able to get to your boat. Jealous, but happy 🙂👍

 Pics 🤔

Tango.....I'm at a loss for words! That's not true....I lied. I ALWAYS have a word (or two) in the tank.😁

But I have to clarify; I was only prevented from getting to the boat ( berthed in Florida) for March and April, 2020.

The boat is in storage from June until November each year. Once launched and in the water, we travel back and forth to Ontario as time and circumstances permit. 

Last season, that meant longer periods up north to quarantine each trip or high premiums for extended medical insurance.

Owning and enjoying a boat has been part of my life for 40 years. Whenever I think of stepping away, I am drawn back. And none of it would be of much pleasure but for my wife.

And as an aside, you might be surprised by the dozens of commercial pilots we've met over the years who share the same pleasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

And as an aside

 

Great, now ya did it. Jealous indeed, but equally pleased for you.

I’ve been plotting my own escape and watched hours of blue water sailing videos in the process, they make it look deceptively easy. I’m guessing it’s not… or is it?

Maybe a new thread (on the dark side) is in order. Short of buying a boat and totally committing to the unknown at great expense, is there a simple way people ease into such things or does it require full throttle immersion?

I know, sounds like a shameless attempt to help crew your boat to southern climes eh? I would never dream of being so forward… PM for my phone number, I’m retired, available at short notice, I don’t get sea sick and don’t eat much, I’m used to doing what I’m told and promise not to bring bagpipes.   

X2 for pics.

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

 

Great, now ya did it. Jealous indeed, but equally pleased for you.

I’ve been plotting my own escape and watched hours of blue water sailing videos in the process, they make it look deceptively easy. I’m guessing it’s not… or is it?

Maybe a new thread (on the dark side) is in order. Short of buying a boat and totally committing to the unknown at great expense, is there a simple way people ease into such things or does it require full throttle immersion?

I know, sounds like a shameless attempt to help crew your boat to southern climes eh? I would never dream of being so forward… PM for my phone number, I’m retired, available at short notice, I don’t get sea sick and don’t eat much, I’m used to doing what I’m told and promise not to bring bagpipes.   

X2 for pics.

Wolf....😁😁. Were you known for subtlety?

First I confess that I am NOT a sailboater; I need "more power, Scottie!"

I recommend a forum..."The Hull Truth" as a source of commentary on the "joys" of boating.

Though we have done the Great Loop twice and gone up and down the East coast a few more times, our "blue water" experience....Lake Huron to Florida to Grenada and back to St.Maarten....was singular and really was an adventure. We were novices on a motor yacht that could (and should) have carried more pax. We were anchored at the north end of Guadeloupe trying to assess the likely path of an east-bound storm. We were scared. We went north...first to Nevis and cautioned to move on....arrived at St.Maarten two days before "Lenny"....a category 5. Not a pleasant experience and that was enough "adventuring" for me!!

We're now on a small express cruiser.....sorry, only one berth....and the farthest we will venture is to the Exumas in the Bahamas once all of the Covid-related restrictions end.IMG_20211226_134734.thumb.jpg.eda0ae66b746a8c1fe15ebb70d846bba.jpg

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Were you known for subtlety?

Beauty.

My commitment to subtly was the only reason I didn't mention how luxurious sleeping bags on a weather deck can be.

In the interim, off to The Hull Truth I go... thanks.

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, conehead said:

Ottawa close to removing pre-arrival COVID-19 test for fully vaccinated Canadian travellers: sources

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pcr-test-travel-canada-1.6347334 

I'm flying north on the 17th of this month. Any takers on a bet that the "suspension" of pre-arrival PCR testing will be after? Lol

Just a quickie ...in Florida, at Walgreens, the NAAT test is called "ID Now". Results are emailed within 24 hours . If one requests "PCR", you get the "full Monty" and results usually take 2 days.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Remaining COVID-19 restrictions scrapped in England

Country 'moving from government restrictions to personal responsibility,' says PM

The Associated Press · Posted: Feb 21, 2022 12:47 PM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Monday that he is scrapping the last domestic coronavirus restrictions in England, including the requirement that people with COVID-19 self-isolate.

Johnson said the country was "moving from government restrictions to personal responsibility" as part of a plan for treating COVID-19 like other transmissible illnesses, such as the flu.

"We now have sufficient levels of immunity to complete the transition from protecting people with government interventions to relying on vaccines and treatments as the first line of defence," he said.

Despite warnings from scientists that ending restrictions could weaken the country's ability to monitor and track the coronavirus, Johnson confirmed that mandatory self-isolation for people with COVID-19 will end starting on Thursday and that the routine tracing of infected people's contacts will stop.

People will still be advised to stay home if they are sick, but they will no longer receive extra financial support introduced during the pandemic for those who miss work.

 

Many people who think they have COVID-19 may never know for sure. Starting April 1, lab-confirmed PCR tests for the virus will be available free only to older people and the immunocompromised. The government will also stop offering the public free rapid virus tests, though they will be available privately for a price, as is already the case in many countries.

Yet the government stressed that the pandemic is not over and the virus could still spring nasty surprises.

Johnson said the fact that Queen Elizabeth tested positive for COVID-19 on Sunday was "a reminder that this virus has not gone away."

Buckingham Palace said the 95-year-old monarch was experiencing mild, cold-like symptoms, was continuing with light duties and would follow all government regulations.

The new plan foresees vaccines and treatments keeping the virus in check. Everyone 75 and older will be offered a fourth vaccine dose, along with those 12 and up who have conditions that make them vulnerable to severe disease. The government said it will accept recommendations from its vaccine advisory group on whether fourth shots should be offered more widely.

Risky move, some scientists say

Johnson urged people not to "throw caution to the winds," but said it was time to move "away from banning certain courses of action, compelling certain courses of action, in favour of encouraging personal responsibility."

Some scientists, however, said it was a risky move that could bring a surge in infections and weaken the country's defences against more virulent future strains.

Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, which developed the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, said that "the decision about when and how to reduce restrictions is enormously difficult."

 

He said it was essential to maintain "surveillance for the virus — an early warning system, if you like — which tells us about new variants emerging and gives an ability to monitor whether those new variants are indeed causing more severe disease than Omicron did."

The government said it would retain a strong surveillance system, including the Infection Survey conducted by the Office for National Statistics, which is considered invaluable because it tests people whether or not they have symptoms. It said it will also keep the ability to ramp up testing if needed.

Johnson's Conservative government lifted most virus restrictions in January, scrapping vaccine passports for venues and ending mask mandates in most settings, apart from hospitals in England.

Most COVID-19 restrictions lifted in England, including mask mandate, vaccine passports
25 days ago
Duration3:19
Face coverings are no longer required by law anywhere in England, and a legal requirement for vaccination passes for entry into nightclubs and other large venues has been scrapped. However, some businesses and transit networks still require masks. 3:19

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, which set their own public health rules, also have opened up, although more slowly.

Monday's announcement applies only to England, which is home to 56 million of the U.K.'s 67 million people. It leaves England with fewer restrictions than most other European countries, with the exception of Denmark.

A combination of high vaccination rates in the U.K. and the milder Omicron variant meant that easing restrictions didn't lead to a surge in hospitalizations and deaths. Both are falling, though the U.K. still has Europe's highest coronavirus toll after Russia, with more than 160,000 recorded deaths.

 

In Britain, 85 per cent of people aged 12 and older have had two vaccine doses, and almost two-thirds have had a third booster shot.

Health psychologist Robert West, a member of a government advisory committee, said the Conservative government was abdicating its "responsibility for looking after its population."

"It looks as though what the government has said is that it accepts that the country is going to have to live with somewhere between 20,000 and 80,000 COVID deaths a year and isn't really going to do anything about it," he said, speaking in a personal capacity. "Now that seems to me to be irresponsible."

The announcement was welcomed by many Conservative Party lawmakers, who argue that the restrictions were inefficient and disproportionate. It could shore up Johnson's position among party MPs, who have been mulling an attempt to oust him over scandals, including lockdown-breaching government parties during the pandemic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

London’s Heathrow Airport, British Airways and Virgin Atlantic Airways are dropping mask requirements as the country scraps remaining Covid-19 travel curbs.

Masks will no longer be needed in Heathrow terminals, rail stations or office buildings from Wednesday March 16, the airport said in a statement. British Airways and Virgin will also drop face-covering requirements on flights to destinations where their use is no longer mandated.

The airlines’ move follows a recent decision by the UK government to lift all coronavirus restrictions as part of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s plan to get the country to learn to live with the coronavirus.

British airline Jet2 was the first UK carrier to scrap mandatory face masks for passengers following the easing of laws, declaring it was “no longer a legal requirement to wear a face mask at our airports or onboard our planes.”

Friday 18 will also see the country drop all pandemic-related travel restrictions, including testing requirements for unvaccinated passengers and the passenger locator form for inbound travellers.

So could ‘barefaced’ flying once again the norm, or at least a matter of personal choice, in Australian skies? That’s up to state and federal governments, not the airlines.

As is the case with British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, it was only after the UK government deemed made face masks no longer mandatory that airlines had the flexibility to develop their own policy.

For Australian airlines, masks were at first “strongly encouraged” until individual states began to make them compulsory in the face of Covid-19 outbreaks.

 

While Regional Express went it alone on making masks mandatory on all Rex flights from 1 June 2020, masks became compulsory on a nation-wide basis for all airlines – as well as in airports – only in January 2021 as Australia tightened its health protocols to stamp out yet another wave of infections and guard against new strains of Covid-19 which were proving far more transmissible than their parent.

“Mask wearing should be mandatory on domestic flights for all persons in Australia as an additional preventative measure to prevent geographical spread of Covid-19,” the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) noted at the time.

Those rules remain in place today, and the likes of Qantas and Virgin Australia remain beholden to them.

“It is requirement by Federal, State and Territory governments to wear masks at airports and inflight,” Qantas explains.

Speaking to journalists in Hobart last month, Qantas Group CEO Alan Joyce said that when it comes to wearing masks during flights “we know that at the moment, that is the right thing to do. It gives people confidence, allows people to get back in the air.”

“But at some stage when this disease becomes endemic, we’ll have to move away from testing when you get the back into the country and away from having masks.”

“And I hope that's sooner rather than later. But it depends on the health advice and what we see in the research about giving people confidence to travel again.”

Virgin Australia strongly encourages its passengers to follow the same Government mandates, although the airline’s position is that complying with those mandates is ultimately the responsibility of the individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US Senate Passes Resolution To End Airline Mask Rule

BY ANDREW CURRANPUBLISHED 13 HOURS AGO
 

Senator Rand Paul scored a win in the US Senate on Tuesday when his resolution to lift mask-wearing rule on public transport passed.

The United States Senate passed a resolution on Tuesday to repeal the public transportation federal travel mask mandate that dictates wearing a face mask in order to fly in the US. Controversial Republican Senator Rand Paul forced a vote on the resolution using the Congressional Review Act, scoring a win when it passed by 57 votes to 40.

Anti-mask mandate resolution passes US Senate

Despite the Senate win, the resolution is unlikely to find favor in the Democrat-led House. President Joe Biden is personally opposed to it and has threatened to use his veto power should the resolution succeed. Earlier this month, on CDC advice, President Biden extended the public transportation mask mandate until April 18.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...