There is no rationale for travel quarantine
At a time when many European countries are reopening their borders, desperate to revive their shattered economies by attracting foreign tourism, the UK is inexplicably going in the other direction. The Government is laying regulations before Parliament this week that will, from June 8, require most international travellers, including returning Britons, to quarantine for two weeks on arrival.
The most obvious impact will be on summer holidays. If “air bridges” with other countries cannot be negotiated in time, obviating the need for people to self-isolate on their return, anyone hoping to escape the nightmare of the past few months by sunning themselves on a foreign beach is likely to be disappointed. Swathes of the domestic economy will be devastated, too. Tourism accounts for a sizeable proportion of Britain’s GDP and supports millions of jobs, while the aviation sector is warning of catastrophic losses that could force many airlines into bankruptcy if travel does not resume.
With the costs so high, it is concerning that the purported rationale for this policy is so imprecise. It might have made sense to ban foreign arrivals at the outset of this crisis, when coronavirus was rapidly spreading across the world. But ministers’ insistence that, with the virus beginning to be suppressed domestically, there is a heightened risk of reseeding it from abroad is deeply questionable.
Most importantly, why should that stop free travel to other countries – including much of Europe, as well as nations such as New Zealand – that have also broken the back of the virus? There appears to be no scientific rationale for imposing quarantine on arrivals from countries with a lower R rate or infection levels than the UK. It is not even clear why “air bridges” should be needed, especially if testing systems and hygiene measures are installed at points of departure.
The Prime Minister is facing a revolt on his backbenches, as well as demands from the travel industry that the plans be watered down significantly. The Government has promised to review its policy every three weeks, and there is an expectation that it will announce a softening of the measures later this month. But it would be better if the policy were not introduced in the first place, or at least that it were significantly modified now. It is not too late for the Government to change tack.