Illogical, inequitable pandemic procedure

MOST Tasmanians, including me, are appreciative of government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the gains have been achieved with a blunt instrument and there are more sophisticated ways to achieve the same health outcome without side-effects.

Consider two Tasmanians who travel to Perth in late January 2021, when that city was free of restrictions. They stay in Perth a few days before travelling to Melbourne. Arriving in Melbourne, there is announcement of a COVID-19 case in Perth which is then declared a “red-zone”. In Melbourne, they need to be isolated until they get a negative test. All being well, this takes two days. After a negative result, they are able to freely move around Victoria.

Both apply for, and receive, a G2G-Pass to re-enter Tasmania. The first stays in Melbourne for 15 days before returning to Tasmania; she/he has no entry restrictions since they have been out of the ”red-zone” for more than 14 days. However, the second remains in Melbourne for only 13 days, and when she/he returns they have to undergo quarantine for another 14 days since they reentered Tasmania, not days since they left the “red-zone”. Our second Tasmanian has spent 16 or more days in isolation (including the time in Melbourne), and is able to move freely 27 days after leaving the ”red-zone”. There is no suggestion the virus is viable for this long. This procedure is not only illogical, but also inequitable.

Ian Allison Dynnyrne