Skip to main content

Open Borders arrangements [P89/2020]

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

STATES OF JERSEY

OPEN BORDERS ARRANGEMENTS

Lodged au Greffe on 7th July 2020 by Deputy J.H. Young of St. Brelade

STATES GREFFE

2020  P.89

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

  1. to request the  Ministers  for  Home  Affairs  and  Health  and  Social Services  to  ensure  that  the  arrangements  and  processes  now  in operation to open our borders to persons from outside the Bailiwick of Jersey are made as safe and effective as possible in protecting our community from the importation of the Covid-19 infection, and, in order to achieve this aim, to request that the following additional measures are introduced with immediate effect –
  1. all persons should receive a PCR test on entry to our borders and in the event of the capacity of our testing facility being exceeded by the number of persons arriving at any one-time, untested persons should be held in isolation until tested;
  2. that persons entering our borders should be required to self- isolate in the accommodation which they declared in their travel pre- registration, until they have received notification of a negative PCR test result;
  3. during  the  period  of  self-isolation  required  under paragraph (b) –
  1. persons should be required to travel directly to their accommodation and not break their journey, and
  2. persons  should  be  advised  to  travel  to  their accommodation  by  private  vehicle  if  possible  or otherwise travel by public transport;
  1. to request the Minister for Infrastructure to arrange with the bus and other  private  operators  to  make  available  appropriate  transport arrangements for persons requiring to self-isolate, when arriving at the airport or harbour, to limit infection risks;
  2. to request the Minister for Health and Social Services to issue guidance to  operators  of  registered  tourist  accommodation  to  manage  the accommodation provided for those persons required to self-isolate to limit the risk of the infection entering the community; and
  3. that these arrangements should remain in place for a minimum of 6 weeks and, after that point, may be renewed by a decision of the Minister for Health and Social Services; and the Minister may introduce additional measures at any point if he considers that the risk of infection require it.

DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE

REPORT

The opening of our borders after 3 months of severe restrictions of our individual freedoms, is very welcome. It will enable us to meet family members and friends out of the  Island  and  begin  to  resume  business  and  personal  commitments  elsewhere. Restoration of travel links permits people to visit the Island from the UK for similar reasons, at the same allow our tourism industry to begin to function albeit at low volumes. It is expected that this will be a slow build up as the UK has a much higher level of infection than Jersey.

We have accepted that the advice that this could be done safely minimising the risk of the  infection  re-entering  our  community  and  encouraged  by  the  success  of  the pilot testing during the essential travel only period, hence the "Safe Travel" policy. States  members  were  given  only  5  days  to  consider  the  details  of  the  proposed arrangements to implement this policy, an urgent scrutiny review took place which identified gaps in the safeguards resulting in an amendment to rectify them. It is of great regret that amendment was treated so dismissively by those promoting the policy in an emotional and highly charged debate; compounded by exaggerated claims of losing our air links.

The rejection of this amendment has resulted in deep division in our community. I personally received many angry comments from people who considered those entering our borders should be required to self-isolate until they receive a negative test result. People thought this simply "common sense". This has especially affected many people who only recently have started to gain confidence to re-engage within our community and return to normal life, shopping, restaurants and even staycations.

The surprising news that we have identified 2 infected people in the first 2 days of safe travel has deepened the division in our community, as has the knowledge that the arrangements would have permitted these 2 infected persons to roam freely in our community for the 37 and 27 hours respectively before tests results. We have been so lucky that both these people were responsible, acted sensibly and remained in the residences where they are staying. They might not have been, they could have visited restaurants or even visited a care home or the hospital.

We are told by our health advisers this is a low risk. This may be true, but the impact of the risk occurring is potentially very great. At its worst it could result in the death of a vulnerable person, closedown of business premises, many other people being required to isolate and economic damage. This is too great to allow the risk to go unmanaged, to do so is gambling.

The proposition simply puts in place the additional safeguards in the procedure to close the gap and manages this risk. Its details draw upon those applied in other island communities. They are proportionate, and practical to operate. I have proposed they are introduced immediately and last for a short period only, unless they need to be renewed in 6 weeks or strengthened if the risks increase.

To those that argue the inconvenience is too great, my response is this is a small price to pay for the benefits of reopening our borders. We can reduce the time required for self -isolation before providing test results and cope with a higher volume of tests, when we acquire the planned local testing capability.

Page - 3

P.89/2020

Financial and manpower statement

There  will  be  additional  financial  and  manpower  implications  arising  from  this proposition but it has not proved possible to quantify them at this stage. However, these measures are required for the protection of public health and funds can be provided from the additional resources identified for combating Covid-19 over the last 4 months.