Member since 05 Oct 2017
Total posts 52
Originally Posted by Grannular
Originally Posted by TheFreqFlyer
Originally Posted by mviy
If they leave and don’t come back till after borders reopen it would be much less likely to be enforced than if they went away for say three weeks for a holiday and then came back.
I agree. And that's probably what most people who are looking at using this loophole will be doing. I don't think there will be many who are intending on leaving for 3 weeks and then try to return, only to face complications in making travel bookings and spend $3000 on a 2-week stay in quarantine.
No rational person would be willing to endure that. However, to leave Australia and stay away for a year or two at least, to get back to their lives overseas? Yes. Many people are waiting to do that and some might exploit the loophole for this reason.
OK I didn't know that. Anyway, it's clear that those most desperate to leave are normally resident overseas and would like to get back to their lives. Makes sense they'd be allowed to depart.
Personally I'd seriously consider returning home to Australia in 6 months from now, if there were no restrictions on entry but I'm not doing a quarantine and I don't want to get tested either. Especially not with young children in tow. It's just asking too much and I don't have spare funds to waste on such things. I'll come back when none of this applies anymore.
Originally Posted by GoRobin
Actually, why should there be any restrictions to leave the country if one wants to? Why does the government want to make it a crime? It is already almost impossible to get back unless you have a lot of money for an expensive flight and willing to pay for the mandatory quarantine. Plus, if you want to come back from some countries it is all but impossible. So why make it a crime that someone leaves when the government knows that you probably won't be coming back until the end of their perpetual pandemic? The only answer I can come up with is that Minister Dr Hunt has no plan for anything.
Excellent point. Although in my opinion, the quarantine that has to be paid for by the user (strange that a poorer country like Thailand continues to pay for the quarantine of it's citizens returning home but rich Australia charges it's citizens) and all the restrictions on entry are relatively speaking, more of a burden than the restrictions on leaving. This is because most of the world remains largely closed. Most Asian countries and some European ones impose mandatory hotel quarantines, as does Canada. Only a couple of Eastern/Central European and Middle Eastern countries, a few Central American countries, the Maldives and a few in Africa don't, but even some of these impose certain restrictions such as needing to be tested at the port of entry or your accommodation. The restrictions change almost daily, so international travel right now is a nightmare.
That being said, if you want to leave and can meet the entry requirements of the country you're heading to, you should be allowed to depart Australia.
Therefore, my gripe continues to be with the ridiculous entry requirements into Australia, something the USA doesn't impose. An American can freely return home with just a negative PCR test and walk out of the airport to go about their business.
Member since 07 May 2020
Total posts 70
@TheFreFlyer...No doubt it is going to be a very long way off before Australia will abandon the mandatory 14 day quarantine. I have said this before. No state has the risk appetite to be the first to challenge their population by even considering to allow home quarantine. Which state do you think would be the first mover, and how do you think they would deal with some community infections with the possibility of some deaths? Until a state is prepared to challenge their population, vaccinated or not, Australia will remain a very difficult country to return to.
I thought quarantine was decided at the federal level? Seeing that all states have the same rules in place. There is no option of flying into say, the Northern Territory and avoiding quarantine. Therefore, if home quarantine is allowed again, I can imagine it will happen simultaneously for all states.
And they're not even willing to budge on the length of the quarantine, by reducing it down to 7 or 10 days, as some countries have done.
At the very least start with that - say you're arriving from the Pacific Rim, Laos, Vietnam, China, Singapore and Hong Kong (among others): 7 days in quarantine. Evaluate again in 3 months and consider reducing it further, perhaps down to 3-5 days.
If you're coming from Thailand, Japan, South Korea, some European countries and the USA: 10 days quarantine. Reduce it down to 5-7 days after 3-6 months, depending on the epidemiological situation.
India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: 14 days. Down to 10 or 11 days in 6 months from now. And so forth.
Would be a start, wouldn't it?
Later, change facility quarantine to home quarantine, starting with the "low-risk" countries but make it 7 days max.
Finally, open up without quarantine (in 2022), initially allowing "low-risk" countries to enter without quarantine at all, as is the case with New Zealand. Start with Fiji, Vanuatu, Cook Islands, and later Hong Kong, Singapore etc.
Quarantine regulations have been made at the state level. They could have been done at the federal level but if that had been the case the federal government would have had to pay the quarantine fees as it is a clause enshrined into the Biosecurity Act. Not many people are aware of this and it was a way for the federal government to weasel out of paying for it. So now it is all up to each individual states each with their own Health Orders. Bet you didn't know that? And who is going to challenge their population. If you don't do the challenge, you will never move forward. Australia's mindset is only elimination and therefore the challenge test will not happen under that condition. You watch.
I didn't. What I do know is that you have to do 14 days quarantine
upon arrival in Australia no matter what. Each state has their own quota
- but unlike in the USA which had only a few states imposing quarantine
(now replaced with a negative PCR test or nothing at all) most
travellers could enter the country without needing to quarantine, except
if they arrived in the states that required it (Massachusetts, Alaska,
Hawaii, New York and Vermont). Quarantines also applied to domestic
arrivals, however, to the best of my knowledge all of them have since been
lifted. Biden's 10 day quarantine order for all foreign arrivals (also
mentioned on ET back in January) seems to have gone nowhere. It's now
simply a recommended 14 day self-isolation period.
means is that except for isolated Alaska and Hawaii, it has always been
possible to enter the USA and avoid quarantine (except reportedly for US
citizens returning from parts of China such as Wuhan - that order
doesn't appear to have been lifted, but I could be wrong).
@TheFreqFlyer....The current quarantine situation in Australia is only mandated at the state level through state legislation. It is not a federal order and never has been. So this is not going to change any time soon. If you don't believe me about the legislation then feel free to check it out yourself and tell me where I a wrong!
I've known that individual states and territories manage quarantine under their own terms since the beginning. Still doesn't change the fact that they are acting more or less in unison to one another. Not to mention the decision to impose mandatory quarantine was made at the federal level, with responsibility given to the states to individually manage it. This is because immigration is under federal jurisdiction.
It might be a round about way of putting it, but I don't see a situation where one state allows foreign arrivals to enter quarantine free while another requires a 14-day quarantine. If that were the case, everyone would be entering the quarantine free jurisdiction(s).
I think the reason why Australia hasn't lifted or even reduced the quarantine for incoming arrivals is this notion of needing to eliminate Covid and not allow any community spread.
The only exception to this, this year at least, is likely to be in the form of additional travel bubbles. If they come into force, we're not likely to see bubbles with more than a couple of countries by year's end.
Member since 13 May 2020
Total posts 9
Originally Posted by Phil Young
I don't like the fact that we cannot travel overseas at present without serious compassionate grounds or to NZ, but I fully support the Government's decision, and the decision to close the loophole for anyone thinking of using NZ as a means to leave. Thanks to these draconian measures, Australia is an extraordinarily safe place to live at present, unlike too many other countries.
Hi Guest, join in the discussion on
Up to 63K fines and jail time - travel loophole
Already have an ET account? Log in below.
Signing up with Executive Traveller only takes a second and lets you
interact with our community. It's completely free and we'll never pass your information on to
Didn’t receive an activation email? Resend one to yourself here.
If you’ve forgotten your password, simply enter your email address
below, then click 'Submit'. We’ll send you an email to re-activate your account and enter a new password.
If you have not received the activation email, simply enter your email address below, then click 'Submit'. We’ll send you an email containing the activation link.
Subscribe to our free newsletter and get the latest news, reviews, tips and more sent straight to your inbox