Indian batch of Astra Zeneca vaccine

lisyloo

MattMattMattUK said:

lisyloo said:

MattMattMattUK said:

lisyloo said:

MattMattMattUK said:

silvercar said:

TonyM19 said:

I have been thinking about this.  If (and it's a big if) I travel abroad it will be to the Canary Islands (Tenerife).  Their current (and I know it could change) entry requirements are to complete a locator form, have proof of a double vaccination OR proof of a negative Covid test within 48h of flying, present proof of vaccination OR test to accommodation on arrival.

To get back to the Uk you have to have a negative Covid test within 3 days of flying, complete a locator form, have proof of double vaccination to avoid quarantine and have test on day 2 of arrival.

So would it not just mean that the person with the Indian batch vaccination should have a test 48h before flying out as insurance that they aren't going to get bounced back at the airport.  Am I missing something here?  Is this not the worst case scenario?  It's not that they are going to banned from entering the country it just means that there is another hoop to jump through.

Let's see what happens.

Not everyone wants to put up with cost of an extra test, the stress of worrying whether the result will be negative and whether it will come back in time. Especially for something that is not their fault and just a bureaucratic issue.

The thing is, if you can afford to go on holiday you can afford the cost of the test, if you do not have enough money for the test then you do not have enough spare money for the holiday in the first place. None of this is the fault of anyone in the UK, however choosing to go on holiday abroad in the middle of an ongoing global pandemic is daft at best. It makes little sense that people do something daft, then complain about the consequences. 

I don't agree with this logic.
If you have £X for a holiday and £Y for spending money, why does it automatically mean you have hundreds of pounds spare for tests? especially if it's for 4 or 5 people.

If you do not have a comfortable buffer, spending what you do have on a holiday is insane. It is not sensible to spend money on a holiday but to leave yourself with no reserve, which means that people should be able to afford a few hundred pounds of testing if required. 

lisyloo said:

Do bear in mind that some of us are committed to holidays we booked before the pandemic, so in that context your comments harsh are unfair. I don't think booking a holiday early 2020 before we'd heard of COVID was "daft".

Some people might have been, but many are also people who booked since the pandemic was in full flow, others seem to be those who are booking now yet complaining about the costs of testing. 

lisyloo said:

people who decide to book now then yes have to accept the risks they are taking, but some of us made bookings beforehand.

Some might, I had three holidays last year that were booked in 2019 but I could not go on, one I had refunded, one I rolled over and is now pencilled in for next year and the other I have credits with BA for the flights and a refund on the hotel. However if I was due to travel the cost of tests is what it is, part of life.

your logic is contradictory.
On the one hand you are saying people should draw a sensible line and not spend what they can't comfortably afford.
but when they do draw a line and say "oh that's too much" you say "well you could afford X so why can't you afford x+200"
exactly because they are being sensible and drawing a line !!

Too many people spend money on holidays when they have no or little reserve, that is not rational. If one has a comfortable enough reserve that one can contemplate spending hundreds or thousands on a holiday, then that reserve should be able to also accommodate a few hundred in testing costs. If the reserve can not accommodate that extra costs then the expenditure on the holiday does not make sense in the first place. 

lisyloo said:

You do realise many people's circs have changed beyond their control during the pandemic?

Yes, having spent much sixteen months after varying levels of restriction and having seen my income drop by 90% I am well aware that circumstances change, which is all the more reason to plan for unknowns and to have contingencies in place. In terms of holidays I have always budgeted for a minimum of £200/20% (whichever is the greater) contingency in the cost and that is with full insurance, if I can not cover that I would not spend the money, and I would not touch my emergency fund for holidays.

I disagree.
I have friends with sensible budgets for holidays but also budgets for other things as well.
When people say they "can't afford" something they often don't mean it literally but mean they don't want to accept the compromises elsewhere is their budget. And that's it in a nutshell.
the people I know would make a (sensible) decision not to over extend on their holiday at the expense of other budgetted projects for example getting the kitchen done.
This is of course their decision but by what you've said you recognise not over-extending as sensible.

They do have some wiggle room, but not enough to pay for increased flight prices AND testing as well (depending of course on how much it ends up being).
I don't actually think your budget is very large so you are not in such a great position, for example if the parts of your holiday that aren't booked increase in price your £200/20% isn't going to go very far.

MattMattMattUK

lisyloo said:

I don't actually think your budget is very large so you are not in such a great position, for example if the parts of your holiday that aren't booked increase in price your £200/20% isn't going to go very far.

That would be after everything else, so for example after flights and hotels, transfers, meals, and particular excursions, then budgeting £200 a day spending money above that I have never had an issue and I used to travel abroad 3-4 times a year and within the UK most months. I would also always have insurance so that would cover any major costs anyway. If I took the last major trip which was in 2019 to Australia after flights and hotel had been paid and spending money was put to one side there was a contingency of £1,800 that I would spend on holiday related things, but insurance was there to cover any issues with hotels, flights etc. and if needing to pay those costs up front to recover from the insurance after I would stick them on a credit card or I could always transfer money out of savings. 

I might be underestimating, but I think £200/20% is more than enough contingency for a weekend in Europe or the Lake District, on top of hotels, travel, food and spending money, with insurance in place to cover emergency costs. 

lisyloo

MattMattMattUK said:

lisyloo said:

I don't actually think your budget is very large so you are not in such a great position, for example if the parts of your holiday that aren't booked increase in price your £200/20% isn't going to go very far.

That would be after everything else, so for example after flights and hotels, transfers, meals, and particular excursions, then budgeting £200 a day spending money above that I have never had an issue and I used to travel abroad 3-4 times a year and within the UK most months. I would also always have insurance so that would cover any major costs anyway. If I took the last major trip which was in 2019 to Australia after flights and hotel had been paid and spending money was put to one side there was a contingency of £1,800 that I would spend on holiday related things, but insurance was there to cover any issues with hotels, flights etc. and if needing to pay those costs up front to recover from the insurance after I would stick them on a credit card or I could always transfer money out of savings. 

I might be underestimating, but I think £200/20% is more than enough contingency for a weekend in Europe or the Lake District, on top of hotels, travel, food and spending money, with insurance in place to cover emergency costs. 

You say it's after flights but what if you "new" post pandemic flights are £300 more than original price so your vouchers don't cover it AND you have to pay £200 for tests. Many people have reported replacement holidays costing more.

A lot of people would miss out on doing things if they couldn't agree unless they had massive reserves in place.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and if you want to you can look down your nose on anyone that doesn't have massive reserves.
I'm just saying that life isn't always completely black and white.
There are grey areas and perhaps people sometimes have other priorities to consider than spending any extra they do have on a holiday. Perhaps they just don't value that holiday enough to spend the extra on it and would rather spend it on a kitchen or something else?

Hanababe1

Regarding the astra zenica and indian batches (one of which I had) am I right in saying that Spain (Majorca) are accepting these batches now. I have looked on the link on this post and it seems so but just wanted to be extra sure

lisyloo

Hanababe1 said:

Regarding the astra zenica and indian batches (one of which I had) am I right in saying that Spain (Majorca) are accepting these batches now. I have looked on the link on this post and it seems so but just wanted to be extra sure

Yep you're correct
Spain will accept Indian-made AstraZeneca vaccine (euroweeklynews.com)

I would be very careful wrt Spain as cases skyrocketed to 44k on Tuesday 13/7.

Westin

Update on Malta who are according to Mr Shapp's 'tweet' now accepting the Indian made AstraZeneca vaccine.

Let's hope airline check in agents follow Grant Shapps tweets...

TonyM19

I'd just like to see something a bit more official to put my mind at rest about this.

michael1234

MattMattMattUK said:

The thing is, if you can afford to go on holiday you can afford the cost of the test, if you do not have enough money for the test then you do not have enough spare money for the holiday in the first place. None of this is the fault of anyone in the UK, however choosing to go on holiday abroad in the middle of an ongoing global pandemic is daft at best. It makes little sense that people do something daft, then complain about the consequences. 

The issue is not just one of money although that may well be significant to many.

Tests are typically required 24-72 hours before leaving the UK. That means most people would have booked taxis to the airport, hire cars at the destination, hotels, flights, transfers at the other end etc etc. If just one test from the family unit comes back as "unclear" for whatever reason, thats it - holiday over and potentially thousands lost.

In addition, there are all sorts of travel that is taking place that most people wouldn't consider optional.

You are fully entitled to your view that people shouldn't travel ever again (and certainly throughout the past 18 months) but the law says they are able to. The issue is how much of a burden these tests place on travellers. I would say it is very significant.

blissfulbabe

I've posted this on another thread, but France will now accept Covishield:

3/ France recognizes the AZ-Covishield vaccine, so it is possible to travel to France with this type of vaccine if you have been fully vaccinated.

https://uk.ambafrance.org/COVID-19-rules-for-travel-to-France-and-the-UK?fbclid=IwAR0Y0K0apCEqAbljiY14HmnO3CA4XJs_gwg3y5gIS3LObJA7s66f-EFMZgI#t1-Travelling-from-the-UK-to-France.