Why doesn't Australia vaccinate travellers returning home?

acersaurus on 29/06/2021 - 15:09
Last edited 29/06/2021 - 15:45

So it seems like the country is in a bit of a pickle at the moment with this Delta variant.

Anyway there are apparently 35,000 people who want to come home and these are the main risk of the cat getting out of the bag.

Why doesn't Australia go out of its way to give all of them (aged 18+) the Pfizer vaccine (most effective, short intervals between doses) before they come home?

Australia is injecting over 700,000 vaccines a week now, so vaccinating 35,000 (70,000 doses) is not overly costly when you think about how costly lockdowns that result from infected travellers are, I'd say it's a bargain.

I will add in a poll to see what y'all think

Poll Options expired

  • 142
    Australians returning home should be prioritised for vaccination before setting foot on a plane.
  • 186
    Australia should not prioritise returned travellers for a vaccine.
Travel COVID-19

Comments

    • Dont Care on 30/06/2021 - 09:39
      -1

      NOONE is suggesting home based quarantine is the solution. Noone in the state of Victoria is fit to manage or recommend anything. I think you're missing the point of quarantine.

      • vetopower on 30/06/2021 - 09:46
        +1

        NOONE is suggesting home based quarantine is the solution.

        Except the expert royal commission into hotel quarantine and leading epidemiologists lol.

        You have absolutely no idea.

        • gromit on 30/06/2021 - 10:38
          +2

          home based quarantine doesn't work as was clearly demonstrated last year when a huge percentage of people in supposed home quarantine were not at home when checked up on. Everyone thinks they are special and the rules don't apply to them or they can just nip out for a quick break as no one will know.

          • vetopower on 30/06/2021 - 11:23
            -2

            @gromit: You didn't even bother reading my post. I already dealt with your objection.

            • gromit on 30/06/2021 - 13:32
              +1

              @vetopower: You didn't address the issue in your post, you just glossed over it saying we kinda already do trust them, but the reality is we don't, we kinda trust them because we ALSO have a compulsory quarantine for incoming passengers. people that refuse to follow the rules will also refuse to keep their trackers on or simply walk out with them on and not care of the consequences.

              • vetopower on 30/06/2021 - 14:01
                -2

                @gromit: Are you illiterate?

                You said:

                home based quarantine doesn't work as was clearly demonstrated last year when a huge percentage of people in supposed home quarantine were not at home when checked up on.

                I said:

                1. We trust people to quarantine at home when they are exposed to COVID-19 in Australia already. There are no reports of these people breaching home quarantine.
                2. Most of the cases of people not complying with home quarantine last year were as a result of mistaken directions given by government officials.

                Don't believe me?

                How about the Hon Jennier Coate AO:

                Together with the considerable concern raised in relation to the Ruby Princess disembarkation, there was evidence that some returned travellers were not adhering to Directions to self-isolate at home. On closer examination during the Inquiry, as reported in Section 2 of the Interim Report, the evidence of intentional non-compliance with Self-Isolation Directions was not extensive. Further, the evidence of ‘non-compliance’ was, at least, partly referable to the poor dissemination of information to returning travellers who were being directed to self-isolate.

                That is from the Final Report. You can read her extensive findings in Section 2 of the Interim Report that debunk your claim here: https://content.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/sites/default/fil…

                You are mistakenly assuming we have learned nothing about home quarantine since March 2020. There have been extensive inquiries into quarantine arrangements since that time by experts that have concluded it is a better option for persons from low risk countries, especially if those persons are vaccinated.

                • gromit on 30/06/2021 - 17:38
                  +2

                  @vetopower: and yet just in the last few days we have had 70+ people from sydney supposedly in lockdown head to taronga zoo, another set arrested heading to the races. IT DOES NOT WORK. People are selfish, so many think they are above the rules or won't get caught and no some moron running a half backed political coverup of a royal commission is not an expert in the area.

                  • vetopower on 30/06/2021 - 18:56
                    +1

                    @gromit:

                    IT DOES NOT WORK.

                    You seem to have no understanding of risk or proportionality.

                    Home quarantine does not need to be 100% effective to meet its objectives.

                    If the people entitled to home quarantine are (a) already vaccinated, (b) from low risk countries, (c) are given clear directions, (d) regularly checked by police and (e) threatened with punishment, the chance of one of them becoming a source of an outbreak is extremely, extremely low.

                    Do you take the same approach to every aspect of your life?

                    There is a chance you will kill someone when you drive, so I hope you have never driven a car in your life otherwise you are a hypocrite.

                    There is a chance you will kill your child, so I hope you never have children otherwise you are a hypocrite.

                    etc etc

                    It is all about reducing the risk to acceptable levels, which can be done with hotel quarantine.

                    some moron

                    LOL, I love it when someone who clearly has no ability to comprehend basic ideas like risk accuses a distinguished royal commissioner of being a moron.

                    You are the embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect LOL.

    • trapper on 30/06/2021 - 11:28
      +1

      There is no way to be certain any returning traveler has actually been vaccinated.

      In many countries any documentation can just be paid for.

      For the price of hotel quarantine in Australia you could buy hundreds of Covid vaccination certificates in India lol

      • vetopower on 30/06/2021 - 11:40

        Easy. Only allow people from countries that have verified vaccination programs to be eligible for home quarantine. Others have to continue to use hotel quarantine.

        India wouldn't qualify in any case because it is not a low risk country.

      • greywise on 03/07/2021 - 19:19

        It was reported only a tiny percentage of incoming travellers ever paid the fees for quarantine

  • REDRUM on 30/06/2021 - 10:00
    +1

    Or they could just implement ART testing for all domestic and international flights, before boarding and/or after arrival.

    Oh wait, even though we have some of the best ART tests developed and manufactured here that take <=15 mins for a result, Australia legislation disallows their use. Go figure…

  • bweiss on 30/06/2021 - 10:08
    +1

    I think that prioritising getting people vaccinated in Australia is the way to go. And then only allowing people to return if they have evidence of vaccination abroad (Australia is lagging in vaccinations, we should NOT be allowing people to come in from countries like the UK / Israel / US where they have vaccinations readily available without being pre-vaccinated).

    I'd heard reports of empty vaccination clinics, and doses being thrown away because the current vaccination cohort (40+ etc) were not interested in getting vaccinated.. and they refused to change the eligibility criteria because not enough of the cohort were vaccinated. In this modern day, to have a requirement to phone up to make a vaccination booking is silly. It should be possible to do it via an App on the phone (perhaps even the COVID-safe App would have been a good idea… gets people installing/using the App more).
    Furthermore like the Nandos (and many other food service) apps, it could have even sent you an alert if you were in close proximity to a vaccination clinic that had an available slot (or at least indicated wait times.. i.e. expect wait time < 5 minutes).

    If you then indicated in the App that you had been vaccinated it would have stopped these alerts obviously..

    It really is disappointing to see the federal government and their mismanagement of the whole vaccination situation.
    I guess just ScoMo's general policy of praying away the gays boats china virus I guess
    At least he's on the right side of ethical history with the COVID situation.. but I think he needs to get off his knees, and start making real plans.

    • REDRUM on 30/06/2021 - 10:10
      +1

      I don't think it was so much an issue of then not being interested, they had a preference on which vaccine they wanted (and what they deemed to be the most acceptable risk to their own personal health). As they were not offered a preference they refused, at least… that was my understanding and I cannot blame them.

      • bweiss on 30/06/2021 - 10:37
        -1

        I'm sure if they contacted local vaccination centres, they could have obtained the Pfizer vaccine if they had such a strong preference for it.

        But ultimately the failure to get more people vaccinated still lays with the federal government, and their delivery of this vaccination programme (even if they wish to say that they have abrogated responsibility, and hand-balled it to the state level).

        If 80year old retiree Jane doesn't want to get vaccinated, power to her.. but that shouldn't stop 18year old student Jenny from getting a vaccination today.
        If Jane wants Pfizer, and that means that she can't just join the vaccination programme that visits retirement homes and jabs them all with AstraZeneca.. well she should be able to attend a clinic which does carry Pfizer (heck the retirement home could organise a trip there for a group of residents).

        • REDRUM on 30/06/2021 - 10:40

          No, their age group pre-determines their preference… no individual preference is given.

          • bweiss on 30/06/2021 - 10:53
            +1

            @REDRUM: I don't believe this to be true.

            The distribution of vaccines has 'generally' been AstraZeneca has been sent to GPs, and non-government affiliated centres, and Pfizer has been sent to the vaccination hubs (since generally younger people would attend vaccination hubs over GPs).
            I believe that some smaller volume of Pfizer has also been made available to GPs, primarily for patients that have less suitability for the AstraZeneca vaccine.

            Hence, it should have been entirely possible for a 50year+ individual to attend their GP, and to discuss their preference for Pfizer, and likely receive this.
            If the GP did not have adequate supplies on hand of Pfizer for this, or otherwise exhibited an unwillingness to provide this vaccination (which seems very unusual.. and would likely be grounds for some professional disciplinary action), then the individual could have attended a government affiliated centre (vaccination hub) where they could have requested the Pfizer, or they could have attended another GP.

            There is obviously a government preference to administer AstraZeneca to older people.. since there is a greater supply of AstraZeneca, and the associated risk comparisons are more favourable in this demographic. But vaccination is voluntary, and can't be forced upon someone (so if that person would only be offered AstraZeneca at the time, they can refuse). It is also required of the medical profession to act in the best interest of the patient, and hence if the patient wants a vaccination, and you have such a vaccination available (i.e. Pfizer) then you have an obligation to provide the vaccination to this patient (unless there are valid medical concerns for this patient).

            So if you turn up, advise you are over 50years+ and don't request a certain vaccine… sure you're likely to get AstraZeneca.
            If you have a preference, and make this preference known, then it's incredibly likely that you will get your vaccination of preference.

            • pharm86 on 30/06/2021 - 22:34
              +1

              @bweiss: You lost me when you said the GP would be giving the person the Pfizer vaccine. Clearly you have no clue

              • bweiss on 01/07/2021 - 14:01

                @pharm86: Where did I say 'the GP would be giving the person the Pfizer vaccine'?

                I assume you're implying that I think the GP would administer the injection themselves? In which case you seem to have a deficiency with reading and comprehension.
                The GP would generally just do the consult and provide a prescription, the actual administering of the prescribed vaccine would be performed by a nurse or other health professional authorised to provide vaccinations.

            • iCandy on 01/07/2021 - 08:43

              @bweiss: Nope. Many reports of people carrying letters from their doctor saying they should get the Pfizer vaccine but were refused. Same with those requesting their preference.

            • p3nf0ld on 03/07/2021 - 19:31

              @bweiss: It has not been viable for GPs & non-govt centres to keep Pfizer due to the storage conditions no other reason. Up until a month ago you could only store Pfizer for 5 days in the fridge then it had to be thrown out. Clearly, the logistics make it unviable for GP's & smaller centres to keep it.
              Hopefully now it is 4 weeks so they might start keeping it but still for regular practices it is probably still not viable.
              So no, your assumptions that patients can discuss there preference with the GP and receive a vaccine out of nowhere is incorrect. Nor should the GP face disciplinary action like you suggest.

        • p3nf0ld on 03/07/2021 - 19:22

          Up until the 24th May, the Pfizer vaccine could only be stored in the fridge for 5 days before it had to be thrown out. This makes it unviable for local vaccination centres and GPs to keep it (ie you get a shipment on Friday & have to throw it out on Tuesday night).
          This meant that Pfizer was only available in limited quantities from hospitals and major vaccine hubs.
          So basically GPs and other vaccination centres could only stock AstraZeneca.
          Its not rocket science guys.
          In addition, Pfizer has to be kept below -70°c as it is distributed. Obviously this make its super difficult to supply to regional areas of Australia. There was also a Astra Zeneca manufacturing plant in Australia. Hence, the Aust government had no choice but to focus on Astra Zeneca.
          After 24th May, the TGA stipulated that Pfizer could be kept for 4 weeks in the fridge. This makes it possible for more regional vaccination centres to keep it. BUT GPs still probably won't want to deal with the hassle and its easier to send them somewhere else rather than worry about the logistics.

  • GordonD on 30/06/2021 - 10:46

    The logistics of vaccinating Australians when they applied to return would be a nightmare. You'd need a supply of the vaccine at every embassy, along with someone qualified to inject it, and qualified to watch the person for a time to ensure there weren't any immediate adverse reactions. Perhaps it could be done when the bookings for each plane load of returnees was being organised. Come and collect your ticket, and get vaccinated.

    But as an idea its a good one given how many of the cases of covid-infected people leaving quarantine and going out into the community involve them CATCHING it from someone else in quarantine. If someone goes into a quarantine hospital already infected that's detected while they're there. But if someone catches covid when they close to the end of their quarantine period they can be out of quarantine and out in the community spreading it before it reaches the stage where it can be detected. Vaccinating everyone before they went into quarantine would prevent or at least substantially reduce that.

    • bweiss on 30/06/2021 - 11:03

      I think such vaccination should not occur at the embassy. That's a bad idea.
      It should occur at a vaccination facility PRIOR to attending the embassy to apply. The applicant should have to provide evidence of the vaccination along with their evidence of residency (or entry reason).

      It wouldn't be legally possible for the government to arbitrarily reject applicants without vaccination… but they are entitled to enact two 'queues'.. one which moves regularly 'fast' for vaccinated individuals.. and another which moves dramatically slower.. some would say not at all.. for those unvaccinated individuals.

      We really want the numbers to work in our favour…
      We want to be vaccinating people within Australia as fast the Australian government can get their hands on vaccines to administer. And…
      We want to be admitting people back into Australia as slowly as other nations are able to vaccinate those offshore applicants wanting to arrive here.
      This way, for every person that is admitted our overall vaccination % increases, all the while we're still internally increasing the overall vaccination % also.

      • greywise on 03/07/2021 - 19:30

        When I entered UK in 1970 I had to show a small booklet to show I had been vaccinated. The immigration dont trust the certifications by doctors from a certain Commonwealth country there. I saw the people from this country had to be re vaccinated. Times might have changed.

        • bweiss on 04/07/2021 - 10:53

          Yeah, bloody Canada!!

          But I believe corruption is the Australian way… so good on them for being true-okka ;)

          I'd agree though, it's not 100% reliable, but it's better than the current situation where it's only the PCR tests required, and those can also be faked. I'd say that vaccination certificates should be required from all those that wish to join the 'fast' queue. PCR tests could still be required also (and I believe all airlines are requiring these anyway.. for their own liability reasons).

  • trapper on 30/06/2021 - 11:04
    +1

    Have you noticed that even with thousands of arrivals every week the number in the queue doesn't seem to drop… or even rises?

    There is not only 35,000 citizens waiting to fly to Australia, that is just the tip of the iceberg.

  • anotherbloke on 30/06/2021 - 11:04
    +1

    For everyone who thinks returned travellers should be banned and should not have been allowed to leave in the first place, get your head out of sand and do some research. Most these "travellers" are Australian citizens or residents. They are not allowed to leave unless they have significant reason like someone dying or for medical treatment.
    "But what about the bloke who went overseas to get married" you say. If you look at Facebook groups for stranded Aussies, it's pretty evident that the exemption requests to leave the country or get back in(for non citizens) are pretty much at the mercy of the DFAT person reviewing it. In many cases people are not granted exemption to see dying parents, while in other cases they have been allowed to go get married. In any event, people are paying upwards of $5000 to buy a ticket back home, and $4000 quarantine fee per person. No wonder so many are still stranded.
    All this futile discussion and fear-mongering about returning "travellers" is divulging the people from the real issue. Everyone knew Covid is here to stay so what did our government do to make sure when the inevitable outbreaks happened we were well equipped to handle them.
    Did we vaccinate everyone? No because our suppliers betrayed us.
    Alright, so did we start production in the country? Not enough to make a difference
    Returned "travellers" keep bringing the virus back, what did we do to reduce the risk over the last 12 months? Well, we blamed the states even though constitution says it's a Federal responsibility. We are "thinking" about building quarantine facilities in places other than Darwin. Oh and we banned incoming flights and reduced incoming passenger count at every opportunity. We always take the easy way out - shut the borders, lockdown the country and hope the wave subsides. Repeat the steps every-time this happens, no need to think ahead and adapt preventive measures.

  • trapper on 30/06/2021 - 11:09
    +1

    It wouldn't work anyway.

    People need to be vaccinated at a medical facility and so immigration would be relying on documentation that this vaccination had actually taken place.

    And as we saw in the India debacle (with the requirement for a negative covid test before flying) these things are just bought and paid for with no test ever taking place. In many counties this is just the norm.

    • acersaurus on 30/06/2021 - 11:40
      -1

      That's if you outsource it to third party companies.

      If the federal government runs the vaccination sites overseas, potentially hiring overseas nurses to administer the vaccines, you could be confident it would happen.

      No doubt overseas nurses would be busy and difficult to hire, but it's a small number of people who need to be vaccinated so they could be paid a little more than the market rate to attract their services.

      • trapper on 30/06/2021 - 11:56
        +3

        You have to outsource it to local companies.

        How can Australia go in and run it's own medical facilities in dozens or hundreds of countries across the world lol It wouldn't even be legal in many cases.

        Just imagine the logistics.

        • acersaurus on 30/06/2021 - 12:06

          Outsourcing to local companies is OK I think in countries that do not have high levels of corruption and bribery. You aren't going to be able to bribe a Dutch doctor too easily to say you have had a vaccine.

          The gov could potentially try to run them directly in other countries, or at least the ones with high numbers of returning travellers. Yes the logistics would be difficult, but it's been said before the pandemic warrants a war effort.

          • petry on 04/07/2021 - 11:06
            -1

            @acersaurus: outsourcing is unregulated, and regulation is a dead concept in OZ.

            maybe look at the doctors employed here to do stuff would enlighten you…

  • OzHunterNSW on 30/06/2021 - 12:00

    Apparently they are about to do that now

  • Ononono on 30/06/2021 - 12:20
    +5

    People need to be asking why did the government go all-in with AstraZeneca. Oh wait, it's because Kieran Schneemann lobbied for it and he's a former LNP chief of staff. Just remember that we got screwed because Scotty from marketing wanted to give his mate a fat pay check

  • happydude on 30/06/2021 - 12:59
    +2

    When Italy said we couldn't export the AstraZeneca vaccine out of Europe, I have no idea why we didn't just ship it to every Australian embassy in the EU and get the expats jabbed.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-05/italy-eu-block-250000…

    • nephilim on 30/06/2021 - 13:04

      I voted at the UK embassy like 10 years ago and was nothing friendly about it even to citizens.
      Doubt they would want people to come inside for a Jab, seemed like I was only allowed there for the 2mins.

      • happydude on 30/06/2021 - 15:39
        +1

        It's a good point. But it wouldn't necessarily have to be physically at an embassy. More like a few "pop-up shops" for AU passport holders.

        I just think they could have done something immediately to utilise that supply and shaft those Italians. I still haven't forgiven them for the 2006 world cup.

  • BewareOfThe Dog on 30/06/2021 - 13:01
    +1

    I heard on the Radio, that if someone is sick, or shows any sign of illness, cannot be injected.
    However, I think where possible, new travellers should be vaccinated, unless they can show they have been injected with an approved vaccine (by the TGA).

  • freedomofspeech on 30/06/2021 - 14:49
    +2

    Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) - The actual difference between those two groups - vaccinated vs nonvaccinated
    Relative Risk Reduction (RRR/RR) - The relative decrease in being diagnosed with COVID between those vaccinated and those not.

    Across Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, the ARR is only between 0-2%.. Not 95% like here is often referred to…

    Refer to slide 67 onwards of https://21a86421-c3e0-461b-83c2-cfe4628dfadc.filesusr.com/ug… using official FDA approval documents.

  • MessyG on 30/06/2021 - 15:03
    +2

    …because we don't have enough.

  • duluxe2000 on 30/06/2021 - 15:30

    What I don't get is the complacency from the population as well as the government. They should either decide that we should get vaccination asap (like Israel, China, US, etc.. ) and take measures to do so (e.g. promotion, negotiate for supplies, etc..)

    OR keep closed borders and develop a federal programs to take in overseas (purpose-built facilities, policies etc…).

    I do understand the gov was hesitant at first but at this point, they should have decided one already , not "wait and see".

    They wait until NSW had the 1st lockdown (in 2021) to finally decide that all age care workers have to be vaccinated. I do not argue this decision is right or wrong, but it's not pro-active.

    I blame the polarised system. Scomo is too afraid to make a bold move because of the next election. And states and federal gov find every single mistake from other parties to critise each other and protect their own interest. It's sad to see an Australia not in unity in the time of crisis.

    • petry on 04/07/2021 - 11:09
      -1

      scomo couldn't give a shit about anything except Scomo.

      eg laws - no
      peoples lives - no
      environment - no

      the worst aussie pm ever - well till the next shit.

  • HeWhoKnows on 30/06/2021 - 15:42
    -2

    Its pretty obvious that OP obviously does not understand how the COVID19 vaccines work, nor the timing and reason for 2nd does nor what they actually do.
    The current govt strategy as advised by the health experts is correct.
    OP is definitely not a health expert….right?
    Suggest OP does a bit of research into this subject and OP will find their answer.

    • acersaurus on 30/06/2021 - 15:49

      That is a super vague post, you haven't said how I've demonstrated a misunderstanding about those matters or what relevance it has to the point you're trying to make. I don't think I have even referred to the reason for the 2nd dose and yet I'm misunderstanding it? shrugs

  • Vote for Pedro on 30/06/2021 - 17:32
    +4

    My question is why are we prioritising non Australians or non residents ahead of citizens? Today border force admitted 20% allowed in were non citizens/residents on short visas.

    Also, why is border force allowing people to leave and bounce around hotspots and come back, sometimes multiple times?

    Also, why are states doing quarantine, when its a commonwealth responsibility, and then being attacked by the commonwealth?

    • alUK234 on 01/07/2021 - 05:45

      It's because, just because you have a different passport, it doesn't mean you are not a human being or "worthy" of some kind of compassion. How can we ask people to contribute to our general well-being in the good times and then abandon them in the bad times? Surely we are better than that as Australians?

      • Vote for Pedro on 01/07/2021 - 07:13
        +2

        While generally I share your view, the question here is not about compassion. It is about our pandemic border settings. Are the borders closed or not. There are many citizens/permanent residents wanting to return. We have a duty to them to prioritise their return.

        Of course, we still should be accepting and treating refugees with compassion. But temporary workers/tourists, no.

        On the question of passports, well, by their very nature, thats what passports do - they determine who is worthy to enter.

        Sydney morning herald reports “More than 10,000 travellers entered Australia to visit friends, go on holiday or for business trips in April, putting pressure on the country’s hotel quarantine system while 34,000 citizens remain stranded overseas wanting to come home.”

        • alUK234 on 01/07/2021 - 11:11

          I do agree on your point about priority - but why not expand capacity for quarantine, why not offer support to temporary residents who are here and contributed to everyone's general well-being in the good times? (An aside to the main point you were making)

          I guess the part that gets me is not the giving priority party but it's the not caring about the rest (well I guess even caring about citizens would be a good first step). Also - on your article, this is what I have the biggest issue with. The exemptions process is basically just about letting in those that add the most $$$. Completely (or nearly completely) ignores the human element.

          I think I actually agree with most of what you are saying..

          • Vote for Pedro on 01/07/2021 - 11:17

            @alUK234: Oh yes, absolutely expanding quarantine capacity is the solution. But unfortunately hotel quarantine is not the answer. Time for commonwealth to step up to the plate. After all, quarantine is their responsibility.

            • alUK234 on 01/07/2021 - 11:20
              +1

              @Vote for Pedro: Agreed - if our politicians could stop fighting and burying their heads in the sand then we would actually have a plan to get out of this rather than vague and confusing statements/ direction.

    • baldur on 01/07/2021 - 07:16
      -5

      You will understand why when you are less of a racist.

      • Vote for Pedro on 01/07/2021 - 08:13
        +2

        Lol. No please explain it to me.

        • baldur on 01/07/2021 - 08:24
          -5

          racist people never admit/realise that they are racist.

          • Vote for Pedro on 01/07/2021 - 10:35
            +2

            @baldur: You got nothing have you?

            It seems you may be the racist yourself because you’re assuming that only a certain race can be a citizen/permanent resident of Australia.

            You might not be aware but we have citizens/permanent residents of all races and nationalities. And wherever in the world they are, they should absolutely be prioritised over non citizens and non residents. It’s our national obligation.

  • berry580 on 30/06/2021 - 18:20

    if they're paying for it all, I don't see why not.

  • [Deactivated] on 30/06/2021 - 18:52
    -2

    As I just posted elsewhere, there's no cat in that bag, it's empty.

    Does no-one wonder why government wants to 'mandate' jabs for aged care workers, and why those workers immediately organised a strike from the 5-7th July if it's such a good 'choice for their health'? These people are some of the lowest paid in Australia, who do the job because they care about people no-one else gives a stuff about. With that in mind, doesn't it seem contradictory they would risk 'harming' their clients who most of the selfish people demanding they get jabbed couldn't be arsed to look after themselves? Think about it for a while. Your IQ might even raise slightly. Could it be because they've already seen the results… nah, it just couldn't be that, because that would mean our nanny state parent doesn't have OUR best interests at heart. Just stop whining and let daddy SloMo stuff that dummy back in our mouth and medicate us back off to sleep. Baaa!!!

  • striker5950 on 30/06/2021 - 23:05

    this only happened when they got too comfortable and started letting in overseas danger zone travellers and infected flight crew members, also the loose hotel quarantine.. I say who ever feels like going on an overseas trip in this shit time (unless its absolutely necessary like dying family member etc) let them stay there and don't let them back in.

  • striker5950 on 30/06/2021 - 23:14

    why do Chinese people get mad when we say china F#*ked up? i know they love their country and all but when we say it was china we are not talking about the people, we are clearly talking about the government. of course there are many still loyal to the corrupt regime in china so they feel personally attacked when a fact is spoken.. china stopped the world for 2 years and counting, completely changed our lives for the worst. they have the audacity to embargo the world after that too. also how funny was it when the corona thing started in china they were banning black people from entering restaurants, they were saying that black people brought the virus and they might carry it. this level of racism but they cry wolf when someone speaks ill of china. don't forget the concentration camps for the native uyghur people with their ethnic cleansing, they took a page right out of hitler's book.

    • Cluster on 01/07/2021 - 14:10

      One of the greatest cons the Communist Party of China ever pulled was convincing the people that the Party, people, and country are all one thing. If anyone criticizes the Party then they are seen to be personally critical and insulting to every Chinese.

      It's also worth noting that in China, the people are told through all mainstream media that the virus did not originate in China. No, instead it came from the USA from one of their labs.

    • petry on 03/07/2021 - 23:55
      -2

      murdoch garbage. embarassing.

      the yanks have so many level 4 bio-warfare labs and spent so much on bat research that in all probability it did. question is when and where?

  • da1andonly on 01/07/2021 - 00:28

    What they should do is do a sandbox like what Thailand is about to do, where you would vaccinate everyone in Tasmania and make it a quarantine island for everyone travelling to Australia. And like after 14-21 days they can travel to the rest of the country.

    • acersaurus on 01/07/2021 - 07:55

      That's a good idea in my opinion, the problem is Tasmania does not have enough hotel space.

      Could possibly do it in NT instead and use refugee style tents to hold more people once hotels are full (given the time it takes to build new facilities). NT is warm enough for this.

  • baldur on 01/07/2021 - 07:15

    It's unbelievable Australian citizens almost can't leave or enter Australia. If this is not a breach of human rights, then what is?

    • Cluster on 01/07/2021 - 14:13

      You need a good reason to leave the country because there is a long queue of people waiting to get back in.

      Imagine if we let everyone holiday overseas as much as they liked. We would have thousands of travelers wanting to return every week. Do you think we have the hotel and quarantine capacity to handle the load? Is it fair that we delay an Australian in India wanting to return for months because someone else booked a 2 week holiday to Europe last week?

  • YoungQuan on 01/07/2021 - 07:39
    +3

    Vaccine sale pitch on OzBargain, haha… good one. Do you realise that NONE of the Covid-19 vaccines have full TGA approval?

    • acersaurus on 01/07/2021 - 11:03

      Just for the sake of discussion. It is a little frustrating being in the pandemic and, like virtually everyone, having no control over the situation as it unfolds, and seeing questionable Government decisions being made etc..

      I realise that about the vaccines, guess it's an emergency situation and all.

  • jv on 01/07/2021 - 09:50

    Why doesn't Australia go out of its way to give all of them (aged 18+) the Pfizer vaccine

    Where is Australia going to get it from? We don't make Pfizer.

    Why can't the travellers get it themselves before they fly in?

    • iridiumstem on 01/07/2021 - 09:58
      +1

      I would assume that it makes little sense for the country to share already scarce vaccine to someone who is leaving.

    • acersaurus on 01/07/2021 - 10:35

      You don't have to make it on shore to have it. We are getting 600k doses of Pfizer a week currently.

    • neonlight on 03/07/2021 - 09:45

      If we don't make it then make it happen get the license or manufacturer to establish and make locally. Otherwise buy more quantities

      It's the lazy government

      They made mistake putting everything in AstraZeneca. And wants everyone to take that first rather.

      They declined pfizer offer which was a shameful last year

      • jv on 03/07/2021 - 10:19

        If we don't make it then make it happen get the license or manufacturer to establish and make locally.

        We don't have the facilities to make it here… Not until around mid next year at the earliest.

      • jv on 03/07/2021 - 10:20

        They made mistake putting everything in AstraZeneca.

        We didn't make AstraZeneca. It is from the UK.

        Our vaccine was being made in QLD, but it failed as it gave false positives that you have AIDS, so they couldn't use it.

      • jv on 03/07/2021 - 10:21
        +1

        They declined pfizer offer

        No they didn't. They ordered Pfizer too, but there is not enough supply at the moment.

        AstraZeneca was preferred because we can make it here. The CEO is an Aussie so he pulled some strings for us to get it, otherwise we'd have pretty much nothing.

    • petry on 03/07/2021 - 23:58

      naw cost 2 much so we didn't order it a year ago…. any cheap shit would do for aussies…

  • [Deactivated] on 01/07/2021 - 10:24

    Anyone who wants to return to Australia should have to be vaccinated. The person who wants to return should organise it.

    The big issue is people are not just returning to Australia but coming and going. South Australia got a private jet arrive from Indonesia with a known covid positive passenger. Queensland also got a case a couple of days ago from Indonesia where the person has traveled back and forth multiple times during the pandemic. I didn't think we lived in a particularly corrupt country but some of the recent news is disturbing.

    • MementoMori on 02/07/2021 - 18:11

      Force injecting people? You might like North Korea

      • jv on 03/07/2021 - 10:23

        Force injecting people?

        Nobody said they have to be forced. But they can make it a requirement to enter Australia. They have a choice whether they come or not.

        Lots of countries require certain vaccines as a condition of entry.

      • jv on 03/07/2021 - 10:24

        You might like North Korea

        Have you been?

  • itbargainhunter on 01/07/2021 - 10:57

    OP's suggestion might sounds reasonable.

    I wonder how is it possible for the Australian Government to administrate vaccines (of our choice) to those scattered overseas Aussies, who are now in another country's jurisdiction?

    Do we just send 10K vaccine to say Thailand and demand / Thailand government to jab to all Aussies there, free of charge?

    Only possible way that I can think of is to send vaccine to our embassy and ask them to jab Aussies who wants to come home. But even that would be too much to ask of for our Embassy staff as they are not medically trained.

    • acersaurus on 01/07/2021 - 14:02

      Different ways to do it. One way - the embassies could just give it out, then the recipient takes it to a local doctor for injection. The doctor writes a note to say the person has been vaccinated after their 2nd dose, which the recipient uploads to the gov prior to their flight.

      Then random blood testing of 1 in 100 returned travellers when they arrive back home to ensure the vaccine was delivered, and massive penalties for anyone who falsifies a vax note. I doubt many would.

      If supply is perceived to be such an issue (though it's not) then they could be given 1 dose of Astrazeneca, because we have too much. This would provide some protection and is better than nothing. They could get dose no.2 when over here (12 weeks later).

      • itbargainhunter on 01/07/2021 - 14:30

        Not quite possible.

        All COVID vaccine has strict ordering and stock management protocol.
        It is not a jab that can be handed over to the untrained, not even for transportation.

        https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/17/9355633…

        https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/word_doc/0024/10…)

        Then it will also come up to the legal responsibility if there are any over-reactions.

        If there were any death-causing side-effect, who is to say it is not caused by the mishandling of the vaccine when it changed hand so many times, in a foreign country?

        These vaccines are not a well-tested and FDA-approved medicine and cannot be simply self-administrated like an insulin shot.

        • acersaurus on 01/07/2021 - 14:45

          Well I have been overseas before and required vaccines before going. In this situation the GP can give you a script for the vaccine, you go and get it from the pharmacy, keep it in the fridge, and later you take it to the Dr for injection. So it would just be like that except you'd be getting it from the embassy not the pharmacy. Up until and including the time at the embassy, the vaccine handling would be managed by government.

          The embassy could potentially require people to watch a video on vaccine handling, and sign a form saying they have.

          Anyway this is only one potential way of doing it, and would be limited to vaccine types that don't have extreme cold storage requirements.

          • Third_Gear on 01/07/2021 - 19:45
            +1

            @acersaurus: Ah yes… exactly! I’d be very comfortable knowing the person who is handling my vaccine watched a safety video. Oh and they signed a form!!! Bullet proof.

  • MrThing on 01/07/2021 - 17:37

    "Anyway there are apparently 35,000 people who want to come home and these are the main risk of the cat getting out of the bag."

    This figure never changes, its ALWAYS "seems" to be 35,000 or around that number (or just a really large number that never gets lower)

    why does this figure never change, not because it doesnt change, its because more and more "I am leaving Australia" people, keep saying, "oh shit I wana come back to Australia, let me back in"

    • georgegeorge31 on 02/07/2021 - 10:48

      Actually no.

      That 35,000 number is VULNERABLE Australians needing to return home. The number does fluctuate but remains high because as people do return, new people take their place. And that’s only people who have registered with the AU Gov.

      Time doesn’t stand still, so as time goes on and the situation doesn’t improve people find themselves in vulnerable situations as their Visas expire, or they have 4x cancelled flights and finally can’t afford to keep trying (most airlines don’t refund those flights immediately), etc.

      • acersaurus on 02/07/2021 - 11:48

        Fair enough, so these are the people with greatest need to get home. I appreciate there is a lot of disdain for them but I think Australia has an obligation to help them/should help them if they are vulnerable. Still they present a big risk to the rest of us if they come home (depending in particular on the country and whether they are vaccinated).

        Assuming we will never get good at quarantine or actually vaccinate them overseas, it would be drastically cheaper than going into lockdowns to make a deal with a highly vaccinated friendly country like the UK or any country willing to agree, then give all the vulnerable travellers (if unvaccinated) the option to go there but not Australia, pay for all their accomodation and basic needs to be met - then let them come home 6 months later when Australia is largely vaccinated (based on forecast vaccine supply increases) or at such a time that they manage to get a vaccine overseas.

        • georgegeorge31 on 02/07/2021 - 12:34

          That’s the thing though… even someone who may be in a country with an expired visa probably has already been vaccinated.

          You may be surprised how many returning Aussies (who were already overseas - not just jetsetters) are already vaccinated.

          • RockyRaccoon on 02/07/2021 - 22:55

            @georgegeorge31: You maybe surprised that not All returning Aussies are from countries that are vaccinating non citizens.

            Maybe from where you are, but the world is a big place.

            • georgegeorge31 on 04/07/2021 - 05:08

              @RockyRaccoon: I am well aware of that but the lack of consideration for that in any roadmap is a significant issue that shouldn’t be glossed over

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join