The expectation was high: British press had reported that Portugal would be included in the revised list of safe destinations for the British to travel to without the obligation to quarantine on their return. But Boris Johnson's government again gave Portugal a red card, as it did the first time, on July 6, leaving the country off the list.
To the list of 59 destinations that already been given a "green light" from the United Kingdom for an air corridor, five more countries were added (Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines), thus keeping Portugal out.
The reassessments will now be made weekly (there may be changes in the measures if there is new data) and the border control measures are updated every 28 days (in this case, August 24), meaning that the typical tourist summer season has practically been lost.
This Thursday, The Times had reported that Portugal was well on track to enter the list of air corridors with the United Kingdom in this second phase, stressing that the British Government was in the process of giving in to "powerful pressure" from diplomats and lobbyists of the Portuguese Government in this sense.
British newspaper the Daily Telegraph had also reported their own claims, saying that the lifting of restrictions to Portugal could eventually be done through "regional air corridors", highlighting that the Portuguese regions of Madeira, Azores and Algarve had a reduced number of cases compared to Lisbon, while being the most popular destinations in the country for English tourists.
"Regional air bridges are an option for countries with localized outbreaks," a British Government Ministry of Transport source told the Daily Telegraph on Wednesday.
For Madeira and the Azores, the expectation was that they would be officially integrated into an air bridge with the United Kingdom with this review, at least through regional corridors, taking into account that the epidemiological situation is controlled in these archipelagos, and that they are making screening tests on passengers upon arrival.
The regional governments of Madeira and the Azores are still awaiting clarification on whether or not they are included in the list of destinations considered safe for air corridors with the United Kingdom, claims Portugal’s O Expresso.
For the Algarve, where British tourism accounts for about a third of the total Portuguese tourism revenue, and accounts for 50% of passengers arriving at Faro airport, the prospects are bleak. "It is more than a lost year", says Elidérico Viegas, president of the Association of Hotels and Tourist Enterprises of the Algarve, emphasizing that "the truth is that the Algarve was practically out of the pandemic, but was severely affected by criteria that does not take into account other realities".
Regarding the UK's first rejection of a Portuguese air bridge, "we never hid the disappointment with this decision", stresses the president of AHETA.
"We were confident that this year we would make strategies to help defuse the pandemic months, which forced a 100% stop in March, 90% in April and May, and our hope was for July and August."
According to the head of the Algarve hotel association, the criteria that led the United Kingdom to exclude Portugal was "incomprehensible, they were based on infections per 100 thousand inhabitants, which occur mainly in the worst area. Lisbon, which ended up affecting the rest of the country".
The president of AHETA maintains that in this process an assessment should have been made by region, and not by country, "as in Spain, there are Spanish tourist areas with different rules from the rest of the country, such as the Balearic Islands".
Viegas also stresses that "some English ended up coming to the Algarve anyway, but still, you can see the negative impact this is having". The AHETA head concludes by pointing out that "the months of July, August and September are the months of tourism, and many people who had scheduled a trip to the Algarve cancelled, many have not come and have gone to other destinations".
Comments
Another daily laugh from Steve. Keep 'em coming mate.
- Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
A glib comment from the conspiracy theorists' handbook which reveals that you have - deliberately or not - totally misunderstood. We're all in this together, and short-term social distancing and hygiene precautions can help us to protect each other in the long run. To talk about these public health measures, which I don't enjoy any more than the next person but accept are temporarily necessary, and which in most cases have been introduced with great reluctance, as totalitarianism is absolute nonsense, to put it politely. If you think that's totalitarian you're spitting in the faces of millions who suffer(ed) under such regimes.
"It has frequently been observed that terror can rule absolutely only over people who are isolated against each other and that therefore one of the primary concerns of tyrannical government is to bring this isolation about."
- Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
Norman you obviously need nanny state to tell you what to do regarding your health, the majority of us can still make the right decisions using common sense and don't need any help from nanny state. Darwin was definitely wrong about the theory of evolution or perhaps the next humans will be born wearing a mask?
I doubt whether our ideas of common sense will be the same. Judging from your comments, I imagine your idea will involve exercising personal freedoms beyond the point where they impinge on other peoples', so the nanny state or whatever you want to condescendingly call it needs to set limits on what an individual can do in a society which we're all part of, like it or not. Sometimes those limits are permanent, other times, as for Covid measures, they're temporary. I doubt any government introduces them for the fun of it.
I'll bet you're hiding behind your keyboard wearing a mask as well
Norman you obviously need nanny state to tell you what to do regarding your health, the majority of us can still make the right decisions using common sense and don't need any help from nanny state. Darwin was definitely wrong about the theory of evolution or perhaps the next humans will be born wearing a mask?
Masks. Yes. I'll wear one as part of the overall measures recommended to protect me and mine, and others, as much as possible from catching it. Especially since you never know when you'll meet someone asymptomatic who can spread it like Typhoid Mary, someone who's been parading around proclaiming to anyone who cares to listen that he hasn't got it, wouldn't be ill if he had, wouldn't spread it if he was ill, masks are rubbish and that anyway it was all over in March. People like you, say, who seem to be unaware of or care little for the strain health professionals in various parts of the world have been and still are exposed to from something which, true, most people may shake off, but which is still causing very unpleasant sequellae weeks or months after apparent recovery.
Obviously all lies, of course. Can't trust anyone these days, can you.
Wow! And I thought your mates in Beijing were a really nice bunch of democrats.
Sheesh!
Coronavirus Death Toll
653,967 deaths
653,967 people have died so far from the coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak as of July 27, 2020, 16:23 GMT.
There are currently 16,525,134 confirmed cases in 213 countries and territories . The fatality rate is still being assessed.
Norman why don't you google the new guidelines the UK government implemented for registering a Covid 19 death. Deaths “in the community” can be listed as Covid19 deaths without being tested for the disease, or even seen by a doctor at all. These deaths will not necessarily be referred to a coroner, and certainly not heard by a jury.
By enacting this legislation the UK government has not only made false reporting of Covid19 deaths more likely, they actively removed the safeguards designed to correct it. Recording accurate fatality numbers in this situation is borderline impossible.
Quoting Norman L: Maybe he wasn't OK before but could he consult a doctor or go to a hospital to be checked? Probably not. It's the consequence of a lockdown policy that killed and continues to kill people being denied access to healthcare. But don't worry wear a mask and you'll be safe.