ChatterBank2 mins ago
Travel Abroad....my Advice.
89 Answers
If you have had BOTH vaccinations and can afford the documentation and going to a green colour country and would collapse into a jabbering mass if you missed out.........then go.
If you don't comply with the above then stay in the UK.
If you don't comply with the above then stay in the UK.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Sqad. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//The "confusion" is because people really want to go on holiday to France, Spain, and Italy.//
No it isn’t.
The confusion has been caused by the government introducing a scheme which, when first announced, gave people the impression that it would be acceptable to visit “amber” listed countries provided they quarantine when they return. Many holiday operators acted on that. They told their customers that their holidays would still be going ahead and that they would have to comply with the government’s conditions (which was fair enough). I quote the information provided, on 13th April, by my holiday company:
“• Amber: Again, holidays will go ahead as planned. The requirement to quarantine on your return does not give you the right to cancel your holiday and receive a full refund. The actual holiday is not affected by this, therefore there is still a responsibility to pay the suppliers (for example accommodation and flights) for their services.”
So, moving forward to last Monday, we find that the FCO advice to “Green” countries (e.g. that popular tourist hot-spot, the South Sandwich Islands) begins “Non-essential travel from the UK resumed on 17 May.” But when looking at “Amber” countries (e.g. France, since you mentioned it) the advice begins “The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to the whole of France based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks."
Unlike much of earlier government advice on Covid matters, this has an important effect on travellers thinking of going there and who are prepared to comply with the testing and quarantine requirements. It means that almost all travel insurers will not provide cover for medical treatment. So effectively they are prevented from going.
Since Monday there are no longer any restrictions on leaving England to any overseas destination – even “Red” countries - for any reason. Travellers only have to comply with the relevant regulations concerning testing and quarantine (and that is the only legislative difference between “Red”, “Amber” and “Green”). But, not without precedent, the government has added to its litany of confusion. Only yesterday the Prime Minister, no less, announced that travel to Amber listed countries “…had to be for some pressing family or urgent business reason". There is no basis for this whatsoever. Over the past year whenever “advice” has conflicted with legislation people have been free to ignore the advice and simply comply with the law. In this instance they cannot because the FCO advice against travel means that, unless you are prepared to travel without medical cover, you cannot travel at all. It also means that if tour operators provide holidays to places where the FCO has advised against travel they may find themselves on the wrong end of legal action for doing so.
If the government believes it is “dangerous” to travel abroad (as one Minister said yesterday) then they could have simply maintained the position prior to Monday – that it is illegal to travel without good reason. Don’t fanny about so that people don’t know what they can and cannot do.
I’ll comment about why people want to travel abroad and should not be castigated for doing so a little later.
No it isn’t.
The confusion has been caused by the government introducing a scheme which, when first announced, gave people the impression that it would be acceptable to visit “amber” listed countries provided they quarantine when they return. Many holiday operators acted on that. They told their customers that their holidays would still be going ahead and that they would have to comply with the government’s conditions (which was fair enough). I quote the information provided, on 13th April, by my holiday company:
“• Amber: Again, holidays will go ahead as planned. The requirement to quarantine on your return does not give you the right to cancel your holiday and receive a full refund. The actual holiday is not affected by this, therefore there is still a responsibility to pay the suppliers (for example accommodation and flights) for their services.”
So, moving forward to last Monday, we find that the FCO advice to “Green” countries (e.g. that popular tourist hot-spot, the South Sandwich Islands) begins “Non-essential travel from the UK resumed on 17 May.” But when looking at “Amber” countries (e.g. France, since you mentioned it) the advice begins “The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to the whole of France based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks."
Unlike much of earlier government advice on Covid matters, this has an important effect on travellers thinking of going there and who are prepared to comply with the testing and quarantine requirements. It means that almost all travel insurers will not provide cover for medical treatment. So effectively they are prevented from going.
Since Monday there are no longer any restrictions on leaving England to any overseas destination – even “Red” countries - for any reason. Travellers only have to comply with the relevant regulations concerning testing and quarantine (and that is the only legislative difference between “Red”, “Amber” and “Green”). But, not without precedent, the government has added to its litany of confusion. Only yesterday the Prime Minister, no less, announced that travel to Amber listed countries “…had to be for some pressing family or urgent business reason". There is no basis for this whatsoever. Over the past year whenever “advice” has conflicted with legislation people have been free to ignore the advice and simply comply with the law. In this instance they cannot because the FCO advice against travel means that, unless you are prepared to travel without medical cover, you cannot travel at all. It also means that if tour operators provide holidays to places where the FCO has advised against travel they may find themselves on the wrong end of legal action for doing so.
If the government believes it is “dangerous” to travel abroad (as one Minister said yesterday) then they could have simply maintained the position prior to Monday – that it is illegal to travel without good reason. Don’t fanny about so that people don’t know what they can and cannot do.
I’ll comment about why people want to travel abroad and should not be castigated for doing so a little later.
I haven't got a nasty habit at all like you say, Your just using that as an excuse not to answer the question. I know you have a holiday booked, you've been telling us all for the last 15 months or more, the problem is as I understand it, you don't know for when. The other day you said the first chance you get ( well now's your chance) I shall be gone, you also said that you had costed in your budget any testing you may have to pay for,. So my question remains, why are you still here moaning about it??
woof I have no idea why you have chosen to pick on me (apart from the fact I notice you do it regularly, I'm seen as easy prey I assume) and what's important in my life and deem it sad. I find it a bit odd that someone does nothing and goes nowhere in their life because they have an old dog to think of but would never be so rude to call it sad.
And just to add to this thread ( without nasty) I don't think any holiday abroad will have the wow factor that it my have had the last time you went. I guess the travel agents won't inform you of the many businesses that have gone bust in the area you may be going, eating places and bars that have not been supported like they have here, and they have been totally reliant on visitors. It could well turn out to be a wast of time and money, along with all the extra hassle.
Going on the program I was watching this morning they where saying that all the so called safety measures put in place for holidaying abroad, vaccines/ testing and whatever else just don't make any difference when your spending nearly two days of your holiday in the airport that's packed with other people from all over the world. The vaccine ( they say) stops you getting( seriously ill) it don't say you won't catch it or can't pass it on, because so far the truth is they do not know for sure.
I can think of other circumstances which are worse than not going abroad. Life is a compromise and the tree that cannot bend will snap in strong winds.
Of course I have missed going on holiday for what will be the second year, but those I visit understand that the risk is not worth taking and we all hope that 2022 will see the problem resolved. If not, then we will continue to chat on line as we do daily.
Everyone is entitled to spend their money how they wish and who am I to criticise?
Of course I have missed going on holiday for what will be the second year, but those I visit understand that the risk is not worth taking and we all hope that 2022 will see the problem resolved. If not, then we will continue to chat on line as we do daily.
Everyone is entitled to spend their money how they wish and who am I to criticise?
Latest Posts
Death Of Three Young Ladies Backpacking...
News11 mins ago
News14 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
One World Built On A Firm Foundation
Music25 mins ago
