PP 2020/0094(2)
STANDING COMMITTEE OF TYNWALD ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
EMERGENCY SCRUTINY
FIRST REPORT FOR THE SESSION 2019-20
RETURNING RESIDENTS
Volume 2 of 2
STANDING COMMITTEE OF TYNWALD ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS EMERGENCY SCRUTINY FIRST REPORT FOR THE SESSION 2019-20 RETURNING RESIDENTS
3.1 There shall be a Standing Committee of the Court on Public Accounts.
3.2 Subject to paragraph 3.6, the Committee shall have –
(a) a Chairman elected by Tynwald,
(b) a Vice-Chairman elected by Tynwald,
(c) four other Members, who shall be Chairman of each of the Policy Review Committees (ex officio) and the Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs and Justice;
and a quorum of three.
3.3 Members of Tynwald shall not be eligible for membership of the Committee, if, for the time being, they hold any of the following offices: President of Tynwald, member of the Council of Ministers, member of the Treasury Department referred to in section 1(2)(b) of the Government Departments Act 1987.
3.4 The Committee shall –
(a) (i) consider any papers on public expenditure and estimates presented to Tynwald as may seem fit to the Committee;
(ii) examine the form of any papers on public expenditure and estimates presented to Tynwald as may seem fit to the Committee;
(iii) consider any financial matter relating to a Government Department or statutory body as may seem fit to the Committee;
(iv) consider such matters as the Committee may think fit in order to scrutinise the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of Government policy; and
(v) lay an Annual Report before Tynwald at each October sitting and any other reports as the Committee may think fit.
(b) be authorised to require the attendance of Ministers for the purpose of assisting the Committee in the consideration of its terms of reference. (c) be empowered to issue directions under Standing Order 5.6(3), provided that any direction so issued shall be reported to Tynwald within a year.
(d) be the Accounts Committee referred to in section 3 of the Tynwald Auditor General Act 2011, with the relevant powers and responsibilities in relation to the Tynwald Auditor General; and
(e) be the Tynwald Public Accounts Committee referred to in section 3 of the Tynwald Commissioner for Administration Act 2011, with the relevant powers and responsibilities in relation to the Tynwald Commissioner for Administration.
3.5 The Chairman, Vice-Chairman and any member of the Committee shall not sit when the accounts of any body of which that person is a member are being considered.
3.6 Should the need arise in relation to a particular matter, such as a conflict of interest, Tynwald may elect an alternate member for the purpose and duration of the Committee’s consideration of that matter. Subject to paragraph 3.5, a conflicted member so replaced shall continue to serve as a member of the Committee for all other purposes.
The powers, privileges and immunities relating to the work of a committee of Tynwald include those conferred by the Tynwald Proceedings Act 1876, the Privileges of Tynwald (Publications) Act 1973, the Tynwald Proceedings Act 1984 and by the Standing Orders of Tynwald Court.
Committee Membership
The Hon J P Watterson SHK (Rushen) (Chairman)
Mr R E Callister MHK (Onchan)
Mrs J P Poole-Wilson MLC
Mr C R Robertshaw MHK (Douglas East)
Copies of this Report may be obtained from the Tynwald Library, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, IM1 3PW (Tel: 01624 685520) or may be consulted at www.tynwald.org.im
All correspondence with regard to this Report should be addressed to the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. Table of Contents Volume 2
ORAL EVIDENCE ...... 1
1ST MAY 2020 EVIDENCE OF HON. HOWARD QUAYLE MHK, CHIEF MINISTER; WILL GREENHOW, CHIEF SECRETARY; NICK BLACK, CEO DEPARTMENT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE; KATHRYN MAGSON, INTERIM CEO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE; KIRSTY HEMSLEY, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF CHANGE AND REFORM, CABINET OFFICE; AND SAM MCCAULEY, HEAD OF EXTERNAL RELATIONS TEAM, CABINET OFFICE 3
WRITTEN EVIDENCE ...... 25
APPENDIX 1: 30TH APRIL 2020 - EMAIL FROM CLARE BARBER MHK 27
APPENDIX 2: 29TH APRIL 2020 - EMAILS FROM SUSAN KILLEN 31
APPENDIX 3: 29TH APRIL 2020 - EMAIL FROM NICK BLACK, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE, ATTACHING SLIDES FROM A VIRTUAL PRESENTATION TO MEMBERS MADE ON 27TH APRIL 2020 39
APPENDIX 4: 29TH APRIL 2020- EMAIL FROM KATE LORD-BRENNAN MLC 59
APPENDIX 5: 15TH TO 30TH APRIL 2020 – EMAILS BETWEEN MR SPEAKER AND CABINET OFFICE RETURNING RESIDENTS TEAM 69
APPENDIX 6: 28TH & 29TH APRIL 2020 - EMAILS BETWEEN A RESIDENT AND CABINET OFFICE RETURNING RESIDENTS TEAM 83
APPENDIX 7: 30TH APRIL 2020 – EMAIL FROM MIKE DEAN 91
APPENDIX 8: 26TH TO 30TH APRIL 2020 – EMAILS FROM A RESIDENT TO DAPHNE CAINE MHK AND CLARE BARBER MHK 127
APPENDIX 9: 30TH APRIL 2020 – EMAIL FROM TANYA AUGUST-HANSON MLC 133
SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AFTER REPORT (VOLUME 1) LAID BEFORE TYNWALD....137
APPENDIX 10: 7TH MAY 2020 – EMAIL FROM CHIEF MINISTER TO MR AND MRS COUÉ 139
APPENDIX 11: 14TH MAY 2020 – EMAILS BETWEEN MR SPEAKER AND DR HENRIETTA EWART, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH 143
APPENDIX 12: 24TH MAY 2020 – EMAIL FROM GEOFFREY ALLEN TO H M ATTORNEY GENERAL 147
APPENDIX 13: 25TH MAY 2020 – EMAIL FROM GEOFFREY ALLEN TO TYNWALD MEMBERS: CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN GEOFFREY ALLEN AND HON. DAVID ASHFORD MHK 151
ORAL EVIDENCE
1 2 1st May 2020 Evidence of Hon. Howard Quayle MHK, Chief Minister; Will Greenhow, Chief Secretary; Nick Black, CEO Department for Infrastructure; Kathryn Magson, Interim CEO Department of Health and Social Care; Kirsty Hemsley, Interim Director of Change and Reform, Cabinet Office; and Sam McCauley, Head of External Relations Team, Cabinet Office
3 4
S T A N D I N G C O M M I T T E E O F T Y N W A L D C O U R T O F F I C I A L R E P O R T
R E C O R T Y S O I K O I L B I N G V E A Y N T I N V A A L
P R O C E E D I N G S D A A L T Y N
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE
EMERGENCY SCRUTINY
HANSARD
Douglas, Friday, 1st May 2020
PP2020/0097 PAC-ES, No. 1/2020
All published Official Reports can be found on the Tynwald website:
www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard
Published by the Office of the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. © High Court of Tynwald, 2020 5 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Members Present:
Chairman: Hon. J P Watterson SHK Mr C R Robertshaw Mr R E Callister Mrs J P Poole-Wilson
Clerk: Mrs J Corkish
Assistant Clerks: Miss F Gale Mr S Wright
Contents Procedural ...... 3 EVIDENCE OF Hon. Howard Quayle MHK, Chief Minister; Mr Will Greenhow, Chief Secretary; Mr Nick Black, Chief Executive, Department for Infrastructure; Mrs Kathryn Magson, Interim Chief Executive, Department of Health and Social Care; Mrs Kirsty Hemsley, Interim Director of Change and Reform, Cabinet Office; and Ms Sam McCauley, Head of External Relations Team, Cabinet Office ...... 3 The Committee sat in private at 12.04 p.m. ……………………………………………………………………………...20
______2 PAC-ES/2020 6 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Standing Committee of Tynwald on Public Accounts
Emergency Scrutiny: Returning Residents
The Committee met virtually at 11 a.m. Proceedings were conducted and broadcast live from the Legislative Council Chamber.
[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]
Procedural
The Chairman (Mr Speaker): Good morning everybody and welcome to this public meeting of the Public Accounts Committee. As you know, this is the first in a series of meetings in which aspects of the response to the State of Emergency, first declared on 16th March 2020, will be examined. 5 I am Juan Watterson, Chairman of the Committee and with me are Mr Chris Robertshaw MHK, Mr Rob Callister MHK and Mrs Jane Poole-Wilson MLC. The topic today is Returning Residents. We acknowledge that this has been a challenging issue and I think that Tynwald, and certainly the Members here today, are fully supportive of having strict controls in place. But 10 there are some questions about how this control was being achieved. So we want to take this opportunity to look at where we are, why certain decisions have been made and ultimately how this decision will be handled moving forward.
EVIDENCE OF Hon. Howard Quayle MHK, Chief Minister; Mr Will Greenhow, Chief Secretary; Mr Nick Black, Chief Executive, Department for Infrastructure; Mrs Kathryn Magson, Interim Chief Executive, Department of Health and Social Care; Mrs Kirsty Hemsley, Interim Director of Change and Reform, Cabinet Office; and Ms Sam McCauley, Head of External Relations Team, Cabinet Office
Q1. The Chairman: Welcome to you all and we would ask that before I invite the Chief Minister to make an opening statement, if you could all just introduce yourselves. 15 Chief Secretary.
Mr Greenhow: Will Greenhow, Chief Secretary.
The Chairman: Mr Black. 20 Mr Black: Good morning, Nick Black, Chief Executive Officer, Department of Infrastructure.
______3 PAC-ES/2020 7 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
The Chairman: Mrs Magson.
Mrs Magson: Kathryn Magson, Interim Chief Executive, Department of Health and Social 25 Care.
The Chairman: Mrs Hemsley.
Mrs Hemsley: Good morning. Kirsty Hemsley, Interim Director of Change Reform in the 30 Cabinet Office.
The Chairman: And Ms McCauley.
Ms McCauley: Sam McCauley, Head of External Relations in the Cabinet Office, but currently 35 seconded to be Project Manager of the Repatriation in the Department of Infrastructure.
The Chairman: Now, over to a man who needs no introduction, the Chief Minister, for your opening statement, please.
40 The Chief Minister (Mr Quayle): Thank you, Mr Speaker; and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the invitation today. As we are in the trenches fighting this emergency around the clock, good independent parliamentary scrutiny is valued as ever. I have been invited to give an opening statement of around three to four minutes so I will not rehash previous remarks about the scale of the threat to our Island; the difficult decisions that have been taken; the 45 unparalleled work carried out day and night across our public service to keep people safe; or the fantastic response from our Manx community. Closing our borders was without doubt the most difficult decision that I have been involved in during my career. Council was acutely aware that people would be impacted adversely, but balanced this against our priority to protect life on the Isle of Man and protect our Health and 50 Care Services. I sincerely hope that none of you Hon. Members ever has to take such a decision. There is not a detailed manual on the shelf for a rapidly evolving pandemic like this. However, the Council of Ministers has kept the entire emergency response under continuous review, based on the latest clinical and professional advice and the data and evidence on the Island’s ability to respond. 55 So how did we get here? Can I reflect on the speed with which this situation has developed over the last eight weeks? The UK had its first tragic death from COVID on 4th March. The WHO declared a pandemic on 11th March and on 16th March we moved to require that people arriving to the Island would need to self-isolate. The next day, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office advised against all but essential foreign travel. 60 On 19th March the Isle of Man got its first case of COVID-19. On 20th March I advised against all non-essential travel off Island. On Sunday, 22nd March we announced the border would be closing to non-residents the following morning, with the only exceptions being people vital to keep the Island running or to protect life. We reminded residents that they could still return home and should do. 65 In Tynwald on 24th March, answering a question from Mr Speaker, I told people if they wanted to come back they needed to get back as soon as possible and that there would be announcements in the near future on this topic. On 27th March we extended our border closures to all arrivals, bar exceptions. We listened to the advice of our medical professionals and Members who advocated closing 70 our border. They told us that this would give our Health and Social Care System the best chance to fight this war. When we closed our borders there was uncertainty about how the Island’s cases were going to develop on a trajectory. We did not have the evidence about the level of compliance with social distancing measures; to what extent we were going to flatten the curve;
______4 PAC-ES/2020 8 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
or how the disease was going to spread in our community and what impact this would have on 75 our hospital and our ICU capacity. Let me be clear, Hon. Members, due to its current high viral load the UK is the biggest threat to the Island’s COVID response right now. For this reason I believe those that pressed for the border to be closed will be proved right. Closing our borders has been strongly supported by large numbers in our Island community. 80 Has this been shouted as loudly as the cases of some of our residents in the UK? Possibly not. Initially we were aware of 20 residents who had been affected by the border closure. This number increased at pace when people got in touch. Tynwald Members pushed Council to establish ‘a robust quarantine facility’ on the Island, to use the words of Mr Shimmins in Tynwald on 27th March. 85 On 3rd April I advised that clinicians had told us allowing hundreds of people to return to the Island unrestricted would be unmitigated risk and negligent behaviour. At that date we were aware of around 160 residents beyond our borders, but the number continued to increase. Clinicians advised that they would be prepared to support a process to bring people back but it had to be done under the most stringent conditions. We listened, and put in place rigorous 90 protocols to return residents in a managed, safe, staggered manner. Minister Ashford announced on 6th April plans for the safe return of residents and provided contact details for residents to get in touch. Minister Ashford also wrote to Tynwald Members on 11th April providing further details on repatriations and why we would not be able to prioritise certain residents over others. The Repatriation Scheme is not perfect. We were clear 95 from the start that it would not be for many, many reasons. Officers delivered at short notice arrangements for receiving and reviewing applications for exemptions against the legislation, authorising travel, logistics for hotel, transport, health checks, quarantine and financial assistance. So where are we now? We are in a different place to when we first closed the borders and 100 we have evidence to review. We know where we are on our curve and we have increased our Hospital’s capacity to respond. We have experience from three repatriation sailings so far. Last Friday we let certain people back to work who could do so safely. As a result of these changes our clinicians, in their planned review of repatriation, have indicated that they would be willing to support a move to self-isolation for repatriated residents under certain criteria. Council of 105 Ministers has considered this and is willing to support such a move. Any such changes to our COVID response are only possible if our number of positive cases remains small and manageable. If this situation changes, our response has to change swiftly to keep our people safe. I hope we will be able to announce further details of these changes next week. 110 Thank you, Mr Speaker, and Committee members.
The Chairman: Thank you, Chief Minister. I hand over to Mrs Poole-Wilson.
Q2. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you, Chair; and thank you, Chief Minister, for your opening 115 statement. I was very interested by your last remarks, that I am sure we will come back to. My question is to the Deputy Chief Executive of the Department of Health and Social Care. Please could you advise whether the returning residents’ plan that was devised was devised entirely by the medics? Or were the political parameters?
120 The Chairman: Mrs Magson.
Mrs Magson: I am the Interim Chief Executive, not the Deputy Chief Executive. Yes, I can confirm we were asked for the DHSC team to consider whether we could agree a model for repatriation, and that was on 1st April. I think it is fair to say at that point we were all 125 very early in our management of COVID. It was very early determining where we were in the
______5 PAC-ES/2020 9 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
management of the current pandemic, not least the curve and the spread of the disease. But we did recognise that this was an important matter. We have a responsibility not just for Health and Social Care, we have a responsibility to look broader. We did understand that there was an ask, there was a need, and that request came to us to consider on 4th April. We did do that on 130 4th April and that was supported by the Clinical and Public Health Advisory Group on 3rd April.
Q3. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you; and my apologies for incorrectly addressing you. (Mrs Magson: No problem.) Can you please advise then whether at that stage medical advice was different regarding 135 different categories of incoming people? So, for example, was the medical advice different for those returning from holiday as opposed to key workers returning?
Mrs Magson: Actually from the time of when we did the initial exemptions within DHSC obviously that order was in place at that point in time. And I can actually tell you that we have 140 done a number of exemptions from that point in the middle of March, 198 in total. We are quite stringently managing that process. In relation to your direct question, in that case we insist that people self-isolate and there has been only a very, very small handful of individuals – in fact seven out of 198 – who have not self- isolated within DHSC, but they are generally individuals that are very vulnerable and already 145 shielding at that point themselves; and they are generally for journeys going on and off the Island for patient transfer reasons to a UK hospital. So this is a very different matter, a very different question. We were asked directly for individuals who are coming from the UK who have not been in hospital or having any treatment, because they would be handled through the PTS process, where we were really clear that there 150 is a significant risk around the UK viral load; and that was the main reasoning behind our decision, and the strict and stringent controls and conditions that the Chief Minister referred to earlier.
Q4. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you. 155 Just developing that. The medical modelling that has been made public I think refers to the fact that even if two returning residents were not showing symptoms and breached their isolation, the way that the virus multiplies would lead to a double-bounce effect. Is that also the medical position for returning key workers who we have asked to self-isolate at home?
160 Mrs Magson: The R0 that you are referring to, which is the reproduction rate, has been something that has driven obviously all the different modelling options that we have had, and that we have talked about at length in the public domain around the different scenarios that we
could potentially have. Clearly our R0 at the moment is low. We were planning for a significant difference obviously because we did not know and certainly at this point when we discussed a 165 repatriation question we had no idea at that point we were going to be in this position – as I mentioned earlier, it was very early on. So in relation to the individuals who are self-isolating, employees or keyworkers, it is a very different question. We do a risk assessment when we determine if any individuals do not self- isolate. I can give you the exact details: there was a very small handful of individuals who were 170 not being required to self-isolate, and they were due to the fact that the urgency of what they were doing was more important than the risk of the potential implications of them carrying the same UK viral load. So the implications are just the same, but we take a risk assessment, we look at the scenario and less than seven in fact have actually not self-isolated out of the 198 that we have had. That 175 has been on a risk assessment, as I have explained, in relation to the needs of the work that they do.
______6 PAC-ES/2020 10 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Q5. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you. I think what I understand there is that the medical risk, whether a key worker or a returning resident, is the same if people do not adhere to whatever strict controls they are required to 180 adhere to? And I understand the point you are making that barely a handful of key workers have been exempted from the required requirement to self-isolate where the need for them to work is greater than the risk they pose. But if we are looking at different categories of returnees, key workers or returning residents from holiday the risk they pose, if they are required to observe some form of self-isolation, the 185 medical risk is the same?
Mrs Magson: It could be. It depends on the circumstances of that key worker – where they have been working, what circumstances they have had in the UK themselves – and all of that is taken into account as part of the risk assessment that we undertake for anybody. The majority 190 of people that are coming back under an exemption and who are not following the same strict conditions are following strict and stringent conditions themselves. The majority are the PTS transfers where those individuals are clearly in the vulnerable or the very vulnerable category, and are already self-shielding in their own right. For anybody who is coming back, who was originally in the UK and then was coming back 195 through PTS, clearly they have been under strict treatment in a UK hospital. So the circumstance of each individual is very carefully taken into account as part of our exemption process. I personally sign them all off and those are all the types of questions that we review before we undertake any exemption and that then goes through to the Cabinet Office for approval.
200 Q6. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you. Just one further point on that. In Tynwald this week, on Tuesday, the Chief Minister announced that there would be further changes coming forth in terms of key workers returning to the Island, key workers who were regarded as key workers in the UK as well as in the Isle of Man, and they would be subject to strict self-isolation rules. However, key workers who work 205 further afield would have to come back and self-isolate in the quarantine facility at the Comis. I just wondered again if the Chief Minister has referenced the fact that the –
The Chief Minister: Can I just come in there, Mr Speaker? I think the Hon. Member has slightly got that wrong. I said key workers could come back to 210 the Island if they were UK; but if they were not a key worker, people could come back but they would have to self-isolate at the Comis. There was a distinction between those two points, and I would just point that out. Thank you.
215 The Chairman: Mrs Poole-Wilson.
Q7. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you; and apologies if I have incorrectly stated that, but I think the question again from a medical advice perspective is that the Chief Minister referred in his statement to the UK being the biggest threat to the Island due to its viral load. 220 So I suppose, again from a medical perspective the risk posed by anyone coming from the UK, including a key worker, how do you distinguish between the medical analysis and whether they can be self-isolating at home or should be in the quarantine facility at the Comis?
Mrs Magson: The difference, as I have explained, has been very much around whether that 225 key worker is key to the critical strategic principles of us managing the pandemic. As I have explained we have only had a very small handful that have come through who have not self-isolated. We were asked to look at repatriation, which is an entitlement matter, we are talking about key workers themselves in that process. We insist that the majority do self-isolate.
______7 PAC-ES/2020 11 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
There is a really strong risk assessment and there have been a handful of individuals where we 230 felt there has been a greater need in line with the strategic principles around preservation of life or critical infrastructure. So a couple of examples of individuals were delivery drivers that have been putting in the relevant critical infrastructure for the DHSC; and that is the distinction that we make. In the majority of cases those individuals have actually gone back to the UK on the returning ferry. 235 So just to give you some idea of the extent that we are talking about: of the 198 exemptions that I have agreed to, 21 have had no self-isolation, 11 of those were delivery drivers, three were repairmen, and the residual were employees – though those seven individual employees were to support a critical preservation of life and a number of those went into a care home. One was a cancer consultant, one was the lady who was actually doing the health checks and 240 appropriately donned her PPE to support the repatriation, and one was an Emergency Department locum. So just to give you the feel of the size and scale of what we are talking about, I do not believe that we are differentiating around self-isolation. We have been really clear that they have had to meet the strategic principles and that is how we have adhered to it. 245 Q8. Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you. I think the key issue I am really asking about is the difference between people who come back and are required to self-isolate at home as opposed to in the quarantine facility. Just the change that was announced on Tuesday, and I am quoting from Hansard, was that:
The Council of Ministers agreed that … we should allow Isle of Man residents who work in roles that are critical for the UK but not necessarily the Island to return to the Island and continue to leave and return to fulfil their role … [but they] would be the subject of a legal direction to self-isolate for 14 days each time they return to the Island.
250 And again I just wondered: is the medical advice different in respect of the threat that they pose as opposed to other categories of returning individuals?
Mrs Magson: So again I think as the Chief Minister refers to, we have been asked to look at whether, as part of our fortnightly review around that, particularly as we know now where we 255 are and we can predict at this moment the stage, and we have more positive optimism around where we are in the management of this pandemic. The Chief Minister referred to the decision and discussions at COMIN and I think that all forms part of our process and our decision. We have made a recommendation around a move to self-isolation and that is really a reflection of where we are in this current management of the pandemic, here and now. A lot of 260 things happen on a daily basis. This is moving very, very fast but at the same time we are talking about a recommendation in relation to your first question around the difference. In the context of looking at really individuals that are key workers around preservation of life and critical infrastructure, that is where we supported self-isolation. In the case of this group here that we discussed and the quarantine, the repatriation journeys from 1st April, there was a 265 real distinction for us because those individuals may have been coming from around the world, many of them were not in the UK at the time when we originally discussed it – 110 individuals are outside the UK themselves. We know from looking at the first and the second sets of repatriation journeys that came back, many of those had been on cruise ships, many of them had been in European countries 270 and Far Eastern countries. And actually that is a real big difference around the significant risk of the viral load, not only in the UK but also from other countries where they have come from and where they may have been exposed to the virus. Ultimately that, along with meeting the critical infrastructure and the preservation of life criteria, those are the key characteristic differences, and why we supported this very, very early 275 on in the pandemic and very early on where we were not able to take a view how this curve was going to play out, that we would support the repatriation under strict conditions and very ______8 PAC-ES/2020 12 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
stringent conditions. That was quarantine and where we could be assured that there was significant social distancing on the ferry or the journey and the travel, and that they would also be subject to a health check. That was at one point in time and that was the reason for our 280 decisions and our recommendation and ultimately then a political decision at COMIN.
Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you very much.
The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, may I come in on a clarification point, please? 285 Q9. The Chairman: Please, Chief Minister.
The Chief Minister: I think on the comments from Mrs Poole-Wilson, I would just like to point out that we in the Council of Ministers recognised the contribution as a Crown Dependency of 290 UK critical workers, because we were expecting some of those UK key workers to come and maybe help the Isle of Man on certain key projects, such as the commissioning of our oxygen system up at Noble’s Hospital. We also had a number of backbenchers who were pushing for residents that work in the UK who were around the world and who were classified by the UK as key workers, to be able to 295 come back to the Island. We thought that, as we were expecting UK key workers to come over to the Isle of Man to help us, then it would only be fair that we allowed our residents who were working as UK key workers to be offered that same position. That is why we made the position; and obviously I think Mrs Magson has clearly clarified that they were screened, categorised and had to follow all the isolation, and the queries that the Department of Health and Social Care 300 had put in place. Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you very much.
305 Q10. The Chairman: Thank you very much. If I could turn to the Chief Secretary now, could I ask what options for returning residents were presented, and to whom, and when, please?
Mr Greenhow: Thank you, Mr Speaker. 310 The National Strategy Group were briefed and then a decision paper presented to the Council of Ministers on the options – as Kathryn has said – for returning people to the Isle of Man. Discussions took place at Silver Groups and Gold Group, and Chief Officer Group before anything was presented to NFG or Council of Ministers. We looked at the repatriation question and bringing back residents to the Isle of Man. 315 Q11. The Chairman: So this was an officer-led process without any political parameters set until it reached NSG?
Mr Greenhow: Correct. We were asked to go away and look at the options that could be 320 presented to NSG and Council of Ministers.
Q12. The Chairman: Okay, and in terms of the Options Paper, what were the options that were presented?
325 Mr Greenhow: One of the options of course was to do nothing, to leave the borders as they were. One was to look at the repatriation and how we could do that for residents. That was really the question that we addressed, that we could either leave it alone or we could look at how we brought these Manx residents back to the Island.
______9 PAC-ES/2020 13 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Q13. The Chairman: Thank you. 330 Moving on then, and I think this question is possibly directed at the Chief Minister. The Health and Social Care Minister suggested that ‘previous experience with previous returnees indicated some might not comply with the requirement to self-isolate’. Can I ask what the evidence base was for this perceived lack of trust?
335 The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, I cannot really comment too much more on that because it could … I do not know if the legal case has happened yet, but we did have a case where someone did not comply with the rules. I cannot comment to the Committee at this moment in time because I am not sure where that case is, Mr Speaker. 340 Q14. The Chairman: But we are talking about a case?
The Chief Minister: There was a happening where someone came back and did not follow the rules. I cannot comment because it is obviously with the courts, so sub judice on that one. But 345 once that is through it will obviously be public –
Q15. The Chairman: I am certainly not trying to trap you into talking about any particular case, but I suppose what I am trying to get the sense of is that actually this was due to only one instance of somebody not playing by the rules, that has led to this whole quarantine situation 350 being put into place?
The Chief Minister: No, no. We asked our medics to come up with a safe way for people to be repatriated to the Isle of Man that was safe for the 99.6%, 99.7% of the Isle of Man residents. The medics came up with a 355 plan which we supported.
Q16. The Chairman: It sounds from the previous answer from the Chief Secretary, that self- isolation at home with tagging, for example, or with ongoing monitoring was not an option that was considered until after the existing arrangements had been put into place. 360 Is that correct?
The Chief Minister: We discussed a lot of options, Mr Speaker. Obviously the situation is moving very fast, but we did look at all sorts. Could we allow people to go straight home in small numbers, was looked at. There were suggestions that people could 365 be tagged – I think someone made that suggestion but they were all agreed that that was not practical at the time given the pressures our Police Force was under. So we had general discussions on an awful lot of issues and we agreed that, based on the advice from the medics who we had asked to come up with a plan, as had a number of Tynwald Members, that we come up with strict quarantine regulations in a hotel on the Island. They 370 came up with a plan of what they deemed was safe for the residents of the Isle of Man and we supported, as a Council of Ministers, that decision.
Q17. The Chairman: I suppose I am trying to assess what options were considered beforehand and what as the ideas were presented afterwards, so in terms of these were all 375 considered prior to the decision to go forward with the present arrangements?
The Chief Minister: We obviously had, in great detail, talks about the way back. But obviously when you have tasked your medics to come with a safe way to repatriate people of the Isle of Man to protect the vast majority of our population, then obviously it was important that we
______10 PAC-ES/2020 14 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
380 took on advice from our medics and they had come up with a system that was safe for the residents of the Isle of Man, and we naturally supported the supported option.
Q18. The Chairman: Thank you. Can I turn now to Ms McCauley and just ask: in terms of the spaces on each sailing, are 100% 385 of those species balloted for, or were there other categories of returners that were permitted and then the remaining spaces balloted for?
Ms McCauley: I think actually the ballot process would probably be Kirsty to come in on if that is okay, Mr Speaker? 390 The Chairman: Certainly, thank you. Kirsty – sorry, Mrs Hemsley.
Mrs Hemsley: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yes, the ballot process was a way to manage the demand for the seats on the initial sailings. 395 So I suppose the answer to your question is, in the first instance of the sailings they were 100% balloted for.
Q19. The Chairman: So the first two sailings were 100% balloted for, for the spaces. Yes?
400 Mrs Hemsley: Yes, Mr Speaker. We were aware that we had significant numbers of people in the UK who met the criteria of being able to travel. So we were looking to find as fair as possible a way of allocating those to sailings rather than simply going first-come, first-served.
405 Q20. The Chairman: Thank you. And are you able to confirm that the process, where applicants to return will not be processed until returners are in the UK, may be able to change now that the capacity on the boat is no longer a particularly acute issue?
Mrs Hemsley: Yes, that is correct, Mr Speaker. 410 Q21. The Chairman: Perhaps if I could just return to Mrs Magson for a moment about the assessment and the balancing of risk that has been done? For example, how have the clinicians balanced the risk posed by, for example, 30 returning residents a week? How does that compare, in objective terms, to 5,000 workers going back to work compared to those who are in 415 the community who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and who are being instructed to self- isolate? And also compared to the 433 people who have been able to come to the Isle of Man with exemptions and who have self-isolated? Is there an objective test, I suppose, or numerical balancing that goes on here, Mrs Magson?
420 Mrs Magson: In relation to the quarantine question, or repatriation, in comparison – is that your question, or is it more directly broadly?
Q22. The Chairman: Primarily around quarantine. I mean, the other groups have been trusted to self-isolate based on some form of risk-based … I think we are just seeking to 425 understand better as to how the risk base for the other groups are around self-isolation, and yet for the 30 residents a week returning that had to be quarantine.
Mrs Magson: Okay. The exemption process obviously for individuals that are coming back to the Island – or key workers, or those with PTS, or any other individuals that we are talking about, 430 whether it is those also that were COVID-positive – we have had the same conditions in for a while now around self-isolation. Obviously we are providing, if they are linked to another
______11 PAC-ES/2020 15 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
contact, welfare calls. We have been giving people support with the voluntary sector and support services to ensure that they can self-isolate. So those have been the conditions in place for some time and actually the exemption process mirrored that. 435 Clearly, as I have explained, the majority of our exemptions have been around PTS and those are the very vulnerable individuals anyway, who have been self-isolating. In respect of the individuals who are returning from the UK, I would again stress that the point when we made this decision was 1st April, and where we were in the management of this pandemic and where we were with the understanding of our position, certainly over the next 440 few weeks, of where we might meet the peak. That is one clear difference in the risk assessment. The second one is also, as I have explained earlier, that actually these people were travelling and had been travelling from all over the world. Ten of those individuals were only in the UK, of the original 120 when we discussed it on 1st April, and 110 of those were therefore outside the 445 UK. Along with a significant increased UK viral load, that was the main reason for our decision and that was at one point in time on 1st April. As the Chief Minister has said, we put forward that recommendation as the best way that we could consider supporting what was a very, very high-risk cohort of individuals returning to the Island and could ultimately overrun the Health and Social Care system. 450 Q23. The Chairman: Thank you. So what we are saying is that we are still putting people into quarantine now based on a risk assessment of a month ago?
455 Mrs Magson: What we have agreed, we made the recommendation on 1st April and it went through the processes that have been outlined by the Chief Secretary, with final papers to CoMin almost 10 days later. It was at NSG on 10th April. But we have agreed to review that process. We were asked to review it and we were asked to do that in the middle of last week. We did that on Monday of this week and that paper has now been to CoMin for discussion and 460 decision. The Chief Minister referred to that earlier.
Q24. The Chairman: Okay. So the balance in terms of risk then about allowing 5,000 people back to work with around about 40 or 50 cases in the community: how is that risk assessment balanced against the risk of the 30 people returning and going into self-isolation? 465 Mrs Magson: I believe that is an entirely different matter. We made the changes and the measures on 23rd April. We actually went and asked CoMin for a further week because the original deadline in relation to the original measures was 16th April. We believe we needed to do that because we would then have a better idea where we were in the management of the 470 curve; and at that point we would be in a position where we could support the introduction and relaxation of some initial, small incremental measures. So they are very different processes. The 1st April one was a different decision. The discussions and the decisions that led up to the 23rd were some weeks later. And obviously, therefore, as explained earlier, a lot happens in a few days. 475 As time goes on we get more confident of where we are and at the point of the 23rd we were cautiously optimistic that we had managed to suppress the curve. That is why we were able to support the recommendation for a small relaxation in the measures.
The Chairman: Thank you very much. 480 I am going to now hand over to my colleague, Mr Callister, to talk about the treatment of residents and the practical arrangements. Mr Callister.
Q25. Mr Callister: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.
______12 PAC-ES/2020 16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
I think we can all remember seeing the pictures of the first 25 local residents returning home 485 on 15th April and that coach driving them from Douglas up to the Comis Hotel under a police escort. Therefore, can I ask the Chief Minister or the Chief Secretary was that really necessary; and was it a good, vital use of resources at the time?
The Chief Minister: Thank you, I will come in on that one, Mr Speaker, if I may. 490 I think this was raised in a briefing that the Chief Constable did, that if he was doing it again it would be different. Obviously, there is no book that tells you how to do this, Mr Callister. Lessons will be learned. It has not happened after the first time; it has not happened the second time. Obviously when people are coming off the boat, who could be infected and carrying COVID- 495 19 – and I am not saying that they are – it is really important that they are taken straight to the hotel where they are staying. That is the situation and therefore an escort to help them get there safely is fine. I think the blue flashing lights, everyone would admit, happened the first time but has not happened since then. 500 Q26. Mr Callister: Thank you, Chief Minister. I wonder if we can just look at the Comis Hotel itself. Can I actually ask how much the Government is actually paying for the repatriation facility per week? Can you also give us an understanding of the costs that were related to the transport, the 505 coach from Douglas Harbour to the hotel, and the Police cost for the escort? Also security and ongoing security; along with any idea of the costs for actually preparing the Comis Hotel to take in Manx residents under the Repatriation Scheme?
The Chief Minister: Can I refer that to either Mr Black or Ms McCauley, who have been 510 dealing with this issue? The Chairman: Mr Black?
Mr Black: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Callister, if I give you the answer to your question: clearly there is a rate agreed with the 515 hotel but you will understand there is a degree of commercial sensitivity. If you wish, in the normal way of things, I am happy to provide that for you as private correspondence. But I think if it would be helpful to you, I can tell you that the typical, approximate cost to Government is about £10,000 per week. Now, that is not the full cost, as you know, because it varies. If we have a situation where very few people are in receipt of benefits or are students 520 and in some way therefore do not pay towards their travel, then clearly the cost to Government falls. If there are lots of people who are entitled to the assistance that the Council of Ministers was very clear should be provided for those who are of lesser means and would struggle, then the cost to Government increases. You will know that the arrangement is such that the individuals are charged £875 for their 525 travel, their subsistence, their transport from the UK. And again that varies very slightly in individual cases – some people had existing Steam Packet bookings, which the Steam Packet Company has been decent enough to honour and to take off their bill. And some people have decided to ask us to cover and include in the arrangement the cost of their accommodation in Manchester the night before they are collected. We have allowed them to add that to the total 530 bill if they wish to pay by instalments. So individual figures coming to you from constituents and members of the public will vary, but typically it is around £875 cost to the individual per person. The maximum set by the Council of Ministers was £1,000 per person and the cost to Government averages out at around about £10,000 per week.
______13 PAC-ES/2020 17 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
535 Q27. Mr Callister: Mr Black, can I just expand on that? What happens if an individual coming back to the Island does not have the £100 deposit that is being asked at the ferry port in the UK?
Mr Black: Mr Callister, the deposit is important to us as it commits you to the repayment 540 scheme. But if necessary we can allow people to add that into the repayment scheme and to reduce the total initial down. You will know that for a contract to be valid there has to be a consideration, which is why we often refer to peppercorn rents and the like. But we can bring that down to close to zero to allow people to come back. I do not believe I know of any case where anyone has been disadvantaged because they have 545 been unable to make an initial contribution. Colleagues dealing with the phone calls are pragmatic and sensitive and are trying their best to help people get back. The aim as you know was the policy direction we are working to, the Chief Minister has explained, which was to help people who are stuck in the UK get back whilst at the same time protecting our Health Services and our people from excessive pressure or an additional viral risk. 550 Q28. Mr Callister: Okay, thank you so much, Mr Black. I have one more question if possible, Mr Chairman, and I am not too sure who would like to answer this one. This relates to unaccompanied, vulnerable children returning back to the Island and who are under the age of 18. I would like to know if there is any policy of how they would 555 actually deal with these individuals, because I am aware of a case of somebody coming back to the Isle of Man who is under the age of 18. What will actually happen to them in those circumstances?
The Chairman: Any takers? 560 Mr Black: Mr Callister, I am quite happy to continue to answer the questions, if Mr Speaker is happy with that? (The Chairman: Please.) Mr Speaker, Mr Callister, my understanding at the moment is that there has not yet been anybody fitting that description who has travelled. We are aware that there is one young person 565 in school, I believe in somewhere like Tenerife or one of the Spanish islands, but at some part remote from the ports of entry. You are quite right, that is going to have to be handled carefully. It is not a bridge we have had to cross as yet. At the moment what we do as a Department is send an officer to Manchester to assist people being repatriated, and to work with the professional supplied by the Department of Health and 570 Social Care to do the health checks there. So what we will be doing is making sure that we take good advice on safeguarding issues from the Department of Health and Social Care, who are the clear experts in that field. If necessary, if the individual can be flown to, for example, Manchester it is entirely possible that we ask our colleague who is in Manchester anyway to make a trip and meet up and greet up. But we will obviously have to make sure that our 575 individual is properly approved for safeguarding purposes and has a valid DBS certificate, etc. We may need to send two people. So as the Chief Minister has outlined, this is a policy where we are trying to assist people without putting our community at greater risk. And clearly we also need to keep an eye on the costs we are incurring. But I think we can resolve that one when it comes to it. 580 If you know of an individual case and you think I might be on about a slightly different one, then do please send me any details after the session closes and I will do my very best to assist you.
Q29. The Chairman: Thanks, Mr Black. 585 There is just one more for you, if that is okay?
______14 PAC-ES/2020 18 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
You will be aware of an instance where some people’s bags were searched and some property was taken. Could I just ask if that was policy, and who actually undertook that search, and what the outcome of that has been?
590 Mr Black: Yes, Mr Speaker, I am happy to answer that. I think the instance that you refer to was a case where the security company, which is contracted to the Department, searched bags that it had been agreed could be sent to the hotel. The arrangement for the residents was that they could ask others to drop bags for them – or boxes, or parcels – at the reception desk and they would then be taken to the rooms. Clearly, we 595 did not want a situation where friends, family and delivery drivers were dropping parcels throughout the day at individual rooms because that compromises the integrity of the quarantine process. What we found out, after receiving concerned messages from people using the hotel for repatriation, was that the hotel had initially followed its normal processes about trying to ensure 600 that people did not order in food or did not bring alcohol in, because of course there are individual commercial contracts which have normal arrangements for guests staying. We did find out that a security company had been trying to assist the hotel with this, by searching bags. We made it clear that was not our policy and not our intention. We have received an apology for the fact that they unwittingly took instructions from the hotel. I think it 605 was all intended to be simply a normal business hotel. But I can tell you that we were able to swiftly correct that matter. The hotel, in my view, has been really good in trying to adapt and take on this somewhat unusual situation. They have now, for example, put in a policy that you can bring alcohol in, but they have asked you not to bring in bottles of spirits. 610 They are allowing people to bring in snacks and food but I think they are being as flexible as they can be whilst they are still of course providing a full service. The figures we provided to Mr Callister include not only your accommodation but three meals a day, and access to things like free Wi-Fi as well as some of the exercise things. So it was simply, Mr Speaker, an error and it has been corrected and I think we will be on top 615 of that properly in future.
The Chairman: Thank you. I would like now to pass over to Mr Robertshaw where we can explore a little bit more about how the situation evolves going forward. 620 Mr Robertshaw.
Q30. Mr Robertshaw: Thank you, Chair. Good morning. My question really I think is addressed to the Chief Secretary; but before I ask my questions could I just compliment the Chief Secretary and the Civil Service on its response in an 625 extraordinary period. My sincere congratulations. That does not mean that I do not have real concerns about certain elements of the repatriation policy and in particular its delivery. Can the Chief Secretary assure us that there is going to be a thorough ongoing review of how this is actually panning out? I understand that there were start-up issues and snags and perhaps clumsiness, but I would continually argue that 630 there needs to be compassion in this process. Can the Chief Secretary convince me that there is going to be a process applied in this that allows compassion to apply to these people going through these difficult experiences? And to get feedback internally rather than necessarily having complaints drifting in from various places? Thank you. 635 The Chairman: The Chief Secretary.
______15 PAC-ES/2020 19 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Mr Greenhow: Thank you, Mr Robertshaw; thank you, Chair. Yes, we try and deal with every case as they come to the team and we try and deal with everything as compassionately as possible. 640 As the Chief Minister has outlined, and also Mrs Magson, things are changing by the hour almost and by the day, and we are reacting to everything that is put in front of us as best we can. So, yes, I think I can reassure Mr Robertshaw that the team are dealing as compassionately as possible with the cases that we are being confronted with. 645 Q31. Mr Robertshaw: Thank you very much. I should explain that my membership on the PAC is as Chair of the Economic Policy Review Committee, and it is with that hat on that I ask my second question. Clearly, COVID is going to be a threat for some considerable period of time ahead. At the 650 start of the pandemic our policies, including repatriation, have necessarily been simplistic, black and white if you like. And as time passes I think it is going to get more and more complicated where you are going to have to have an interaction between economic, social, clinical and scientific pressures. How will this imperative impact upon the repatriation policy? I mean, the point here is that 655 the definition of key workers at the moment is quite specific in real terms to Government. But there are lots of other key workers who are going to be key to the re-emergence of our economy again. How does the Chief Secretary and anybody else who wants to answer this question feel this is all going to pan out, because business will need a sense of surety about the weeks and months ahead? 660 Mr Greenhow: That is something that we are very conscious of, Mr Robertshaw; and it is something that the Council and NSG are very conscious of. As officers we are looking at the challenges, balancing the social needs and the health needs and preservation of life against the economic model, that are critical in how we go forward. 665 The Chief Minister: Can I come in on that Mr Speaker, please?
Q32. The Chairman: Yes, Chief Minister.
670 The Chief Minister: First and foremost, and I concur with obviously what the Chief Secretary has said, but if I can say that the safety of the people of the Isle of Man is the Council of Ministers’ number one concern. Now, obviously my good friend and neighbour, the Hon. Member Mr Robertshaw, is absolutely correct that we have to look at our economy, because if we do not have an economy then we will not have the money coming in to fund the Health and 675 Social Care Service, and a number of other services that provide help to the people of the Isle of Man. So obviously when the Council of Ministers is making its decisions it does take on board a plethora of data coming in from whether it be DfE, Treasury, Department of Health and Social Care, DoI – the relevant data – and when we make decisions it factors in all of that. But at the 680 end of the day the number one concern is the health and safety of people living on the Isle of Man.
Q33. Mr Robertshaw: Well, indeed, Chief Minister, and thank you for that contribution. But when do you feel that business is going to start getting a feel of where things are going, 685 in order that the planning can start to be set in place? It absolutely will be health and wellbeing, but health and wellbeing in families and in individuals is all tied up with the economy and it is not so black and white now as we move out of the higher risk areas to the lower risk.
______16 PAC-ES/2020 20 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Chief Minister, do you accept that this problem is going to be with us for a long time and the economy must succeed alongside it? Do you accept that point? 690 The Chief Minister: Oh, 100%, Mr Robertshaw. No one would disagree with that statement. I keep on saying to people, ‘This is a marathon, not a sprint’. We will have a new normal going forward and I personally think the social distancing, etc., will be with us for a long time going forward until a very successful vaccine has been provided. And that is probably well into 695 next year. But we are looking all the time, Mr Robertshaw, at the way forward. We have been working on a strategy to go forward and we will be publishing that soon. It is my intention that we share that with all Tynwald Members hopefully by the end of today, and I have committed to debating that topic on the various stages in Tynwald on Tuesday to show Government’s thinking. 700 But obviously we are working all the time. When we went through the first stage of bringing the construction sector and gardening, etc., back to work we had been working for a week or two beforehand, if not two weeks, through the Department for Enterprise looking at how we could safely bring those sectors back – what would be best practice, and obviously looking at the data from the medics and what they could support. 705 So it is a number of issues. We do not just discuss the Health side of things, we are always looking at the economy and how we can help people get back to work and get the multiplier effect in the economy. We will be discussing these documents – I am losing track of the days, Mr Robertshaw, because they fall into one another. Tomorrow is Saturday, when we will be having our next Council of Ministers’ meeting and we will be reviewing the document; then, 710 subject to CoMin approval, it will go to Tynwald Members. We will obviously publish it on our website and have the debate on Tuesday. My apologies for that slight confusion.
Mr Robertshaw: Thank you, Chief Minister. We all look forward to the debate. 715 Thank you, Chief Secretary. Chair, back to you.
Q34. The Chairman: Thank you very much. I suppose this one is for the Department of Health and Social Care, really … 720 Well, no, first to the Chief Minister: can you just clarify what you said at the start of the session about moving to self-isolation and moving away from quarantine? And just confirm what the policy will be going forward?
The Chief Minister: I cannot confirm what the policy will be going forward, Mr Speaker, 725 because obviously we have got to put certain measures in place. We are still checking data. But obviously from day one I have said that all of our policies that we put in place are being continuously reviewed to see if we can smooth them out and improve them – the experience that people go through. We can only do this, Mr Speaker, when we have good medical data showing where we are with the curve, the number of cases and what has happened with, for 730 example, stage one of the construction industry going back – has that impacted on our number of cases? We are reviewing that on 7th May and then we will be making announcements based on that data. I have always said that we are looking to improve the experience of people who are being repatriated, but not to the detriment of the health and safety of the people of the Isle of Man. 735 And I would like to put down on record that we will make these changes to improve the experience of people being repatriated, based on good medical data and not the lobbying by certain individuals.
______17 PAC-ES/2020 21 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
Q35. The Chairman: So are we saying then that provided the case numbers remain low, the people coming off next Wednesday’s boats will be able to go home and be in for self-isolation 740 rather than quarantine?
The Chief Minister: No, we are not. We are saying that we hope to make changes, but it will not be next week. I think I have said it is 8th May – so maybe that is next week? Sorry, it is the week after, it is 13th May we will be making the decision, and it will be looking at certain criteria 745 where we feel people may be able to do that. But there will be certain criteria involved and it will be dependent on how the data comes in between 8th May and 13th May.
Q36. The Chairman: I do not know whether this was one for Mrs Magson or the Chief Minister, but you will be aware that I have something of an obsession about the key data that is 750 being looked at. Can I ask what caseload level would be acceptable for a lifting of regulations? Clearly we do not expect it to be zero for the next two weeks, but what sort of level either in terms of new cases or active cases will be the key determining feature of lifting the restrictions a little further?
755 The Chief Minister: I will come in firstly on that, Mr Speaker; and then if Mrs Magson would like to comment further. Obviously it will be down to a number of key areas that we always look at, Mr Speaker, for example: calls to the 111 hotline to see what is out there in the community; the number of people that we are testing; obviously the number of people who have tested positive; and the 760 capacity at Noble’s Hospital in intensive care or in the general COVID wards to enable us to deal with these issues. I will now hand over to Mrs Magson, who may want to expand on that further.
Q37. The Chairman: Thank you. 765 Mrs Magson: Yes, the Chief Minister is absolutely correct. We report, in our situation report, on a number of things on a daily basis to NSG and CoMin; and Tynwald Members will also be aware that I provide those briefings accordingly on a weekly basis too. So our ability to manage capacity has been the key factor and will continue to be a key factor, and that is not only Noble’s 770 capacity but also our community capacity. Secondly, our workforce: the number of key workers in particular we have got that are off work, either because they are unwell or because they are self-isolating as a result of COVID
themselves; and the level of testing as you refer to, our position, our R0 rate on the graph that you see on a daily basis. 775 Those three things are key measures for us, but below that there is an enormous amount of other things that go within it. So 111 is an obvious one, and I do also report on the level of 111 calls on a daily basis, and consequently the number of people that we refer to testing on a daily basis. We also look at the vulnerable spread and outbreaks in care homes and residential homes, and any surveillance that we are doing in relation to our testing itself and our testing strategy. 780 PPE consumables is another measure that we use. So there is a great breadth and depth of lower level indicators that feed that high-level position for DHSC on which I report on a daily basis. (Interjection by the Chairman) So in relation to the position, as we sit here at the moment and the way we would consider and make recommendations to the Council of Ministers, particularly around self-isolation and 785 future repatriations, will remain for us the UK viral load. It is still a significant risk and we are clear that border control remains a key measure. So, as I have said, we remain cautiously optimistic at the moment. We are a number of weeks on from the original discussion and decisions and we do have a limited community transmission. But we have had a recent spike and we are following cluster investigations. The depth and
______18 PAC-ES/2020 22 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
790 breadth of the outcome of those cluster investigations will all be part of our considered response ultimately to advise CoMin and they then take a broad response on the back of making policy decisions.
Q38. The Chairman: So would you be in a position to publish the key measures that would 795 trigger an end to quarantine, for example?
Mrs Magson: My understanding is that will be all part of the work that the Chief Minister has referred to in the early part of next week, and will be discussions with Tynwald on Tuesday.
800 Q39. The Chairman: Because obviously in terms of returning residents and key workers, the viral load in the UK will be the same applied to both of them. I am just making sure that there is equality in the system between quarantine for one and self-isolation of the other. And that remains the medical recommendation. Correct?
805 Mrs Magson: Yes, but absolutely the UK viral load is an incredible part and it still remains a significant risk, as I have referred to. But I think, as I spoke about at the beginning, I made it clear that there is a big difference between those – an individual who may be coming to do some key worker work for us in DHSC, who has been self-isolating in the UK and has been part of a particular critical preservation of life position for us within DHSC, vis-à-vis somebody who has 810 been travelling and has been possibly susceptible to increased viral load. So there is a big difference. Obviously as we go through, the position around the UK will make a difference. We continue to monitor that, not only in the UK but across the world. It is part of our thinking, it is part of our evidence base and how we approach many of the decisions we make in DHSC. 815 The Chairman: Thank you. Now I did promise our witnesses that I would let them go at 12 o’clock. So I thank you all very much for your engagement and for your candour and answering the questions that have been put to you this morning. Can I thank you all very much for your time. 820 The Committee will now sit in private. Thank you.
The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, could I just make a couple of observations, please, for clarification on a couple of points before we go?
825 Q40. The Chairman: If you are happy to stay on, but there may be a question on the back of it though!
The Chief Minister: Yes. The first one is that I just wanted to point out clarification. I think you have mentioned 830 publicly that I have not been receiving any questions in Tynwald, or very limited. Every week I give a statement and I get 20 to 30 questions from all Hon. Members to grill me on what is happening with the coronavirus situation. A vast number of those questions do refer to the repatriation side of things. I am more than delighted to attend these meetings every week if that is your request, but 835 could we have information requests a little bit earlier? I have got key officers who are in meetings for most of the day and we only received the request for evidence yesterday afternoon and it did not give us time. I mean, I hope we have done our very best to satisfy the questions from the Hon. Members of the Committee but a little bit more time would be greatly appreciated so that we can get the evidence that you require. 840 Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
______19 PAC-ES/2020 23 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 1st MAY 2020
The Chairman: Certainly, Chief Minister. Obviously what we have been trying to do is make sure that we are only really asking questions on things that the people who have come to give evidence are living and breathing on a day-to-day basis. Had we come and asked you about things that were somewhat different 845 from that then obviously we would have given more notice. I think it is fair to say that this is the first session of many, and as we all get into a bit more of a routine hopefully that will not be such an issue going forward. We are certainly not here to try and trip anybody up, but to make sure that the answers that the Committee and the Tynwald Members and the public want are able to be asked, and indeed very well answered by the 850 officers and yourself who have come and given evidence today. Thank you very much. And with that we will now sit in private.
The Committee sat in private at 12.04 p.m.
______20 PAC-ES/2020 24 WRITTEN EVIDENCE
25 26 Appendix 1: 30th April 2020 - Email from Clare Barber MHK
27 28 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:52:19 From: [Clare Barber MHK] Sent: 29 April 2020 23:07:30 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Cc: [Clare Barber MHK] Subject: Questions for PAC Importance: Normal
A few thoughts from me – aside from the obvious ones!!
Clare
Exceptions – Application of rules and consistency:
How were a family travelling on the boat of 29.4.20 were allowed to self-isolate at home? The husband, who is seemingly coming to the island to join the police force has a wife and child but they were all allowed to go to their home?
How was a local Manx person allowed back on a Monday sailing and allowed to go to the Mannin Hotel to self-isolate?
Quarantine Applications:
What support exists at present for those persons who on arrival in the UK have nowhere to go and no funds to support their accommodation?
What will happen if the UK amend their rules to enforce a 14 day self-isolation period – and what representations have been made to the UK government on the behalf of Manx citizens?
Why Cabinet Office have advised travellers that their application will not be processed until they arrive on UK soil, so they are not even confident they will meet the criteria of the scheme and be allowed to repatriate?
Whether a degree of compassion in the communications to people might be helpful at this time of need?
Why travel can’t be assigned and a reserve list drawn up, once people can evidence a travel document that would allow them to return in time for a given sailing. This would make the system far more flexible and reduce people’s risk of being stuck in the UK without accommodation.
Would the Chief Minister acknowledge the panic, fear, and expenditure incurred by people trying desperately to get back both before and after the borders closed?
What the process is for those unable to pay the deposit of £100?
Manner of Quarantine:
Do they believe that the quarantine is proportionate to the risk, and if the risk is so great, why are keyworkers exempted from it (yet still required in most cases to self-isolate at home)?
Why are those being repatriated at significantly higher risk of infection, as stated in an email from the returning residents email? This fails to take into account their personal circumstances and travel history. Some of these people have been isolating for weeks.
29 Which medical professionals were involved in the decision to adopt the current Comis quarantine approach, what options were presented to temergencyscrutinyhem prior to requesting their input, and by them after they had considered their response, and what restrictions they were given related to any consideration?
Why on arrival are people told that if they do not sign the disclosure document they will go straight to prison?
Was it the clinicians who insisted on a police escort from the ferry to the hotel, stopping traffic on the way?
The Chief Minister talked in the press briefing on Wednesday about the level of anxiety and mental health concerns that are faced by the community related to the lockdown, with this in mind what level of mental health assessment and support has been provided to those residents detained at the Comis?
What risk was it that led to the imposition of a restriction on one cabin size bag being applied for items being brought into the Comis? Perhaps a pragmatic approach allowing some technology for work purposes and some clothes and exercise equipment, might serve to make this time more tolerable for those quarantined?
Post Quarantine:
When we started this, we went through a quick evolution where people who arrived one evening were free to roam the Island (although many elected not of their own choice), and those arriving the following morning were required to self-isolate for 14 days or face jail. When we look to reverse the quarantine arrangements, how will we prevent overlap where those arriving can self-isolate, but those already in the Comis must remain so – what thought has been given to the reverse process?
What the process will be if someone becomes eligible for benefits part way through their payment plan?
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
Cha nel kied currit da failleydagh ny jantagh erbee conaant y yannoo rish peiagh ny possan erbee lesh post-l er son Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh erbee jeh Reiltys Ellan Vannin dyn co-niartaghey scruit leayr veih Reireyder y Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh t’eh bentyn rish.
30 Appendix 2: 29th April 2020 - Emails from Susan Killen
31 32 From: "sue kilen"
Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:48 PM +0100 Subject: Fwd: For PAC scrutiny of government on handling the COVID19 epidemic To: "Watterson, Juan (SHK)"
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Dear Mr Watterson I am sending you various emails that I sent to Geoffrey Boot and the Chief Minister with their replies that you might find interesting. All email to Mr Boot were sent on 28th February, almost a month before the Government actually did anything significant to isolate our Island from the virus. I hope you will find them interesting and feel as I do that the attitude was very laissez-faire. The first emails are the ones to/from Geoffrey Boot. Regards Mrs Susan Killen
______
Begin forwarded message:
From: sue kilen
Date: 28 February 2020 at 11:34:10 GMT To: Geoffrey Boot Subject: Coronavirus
Dear Mr Boot,
Can you please let me know when your next surgery is to be held.
In the meantime please tell me what preparations this Government have made/are making for the spread of Covid19.
We are aware that there have been tests but fortunately no positive reactions but we can’t just cross our fingers.
Best regards Mrs Susan Killen
33 From: "Boot, Geoffrey (MHK)" Date: 28 February 2020 at 12:15:41 GMT To: sue kilen
Subject: Re: Coronavirus
Dear Mrs Kilen
Please rest assured the Government has all the necessary contingency plans in hand in the event of an outbreak on Island.
The Department of Health have been issuing regular updates and so far, although there have been a number of tests carried out, none have proved positive.
My next political surgery will be on 21st March at Peel Town Hall from 11am, however if it is something more urgent please let me know.
King regards
Geoffrey Boot
Get Outlook for iOS
From: sue kilen Date: 28 February 2020 at 13:04:05 GMT To: "Boot, Geoffrey (MHK)"
Subject: Re: Coronavirus
Dear Mr Boot
Thank you for responding so promptly to my email and the information regarding your next surgery.
I have been reading the updates from the DOH and do find them rather vague.
What I would like to know is how the DOH intends to handle a positive case of the virus. Will the person be able to be dealt with on the Island or have to be sent to Liverpool. How will isolation be handled etc. At what point will we start checking people coming into the Island etc
Regards Mrs S Killen
Sent from my iPhone
34 From: "Boot, Geoffrey (MHK)" Date: 28 February 2020 at 15:01:45 GMT To: sue kilen Subject: Re: Coronavirus
Thank you for your further email.
As I understand it we are following the same protocols as the UK in terms of self quarantine. Should there be a positive case then we have facilities on Island, or with acute cases will be dealt with using the same protocols for treatment off Island.
This is not my area of competence, as you will be aware there are few cases in the UK, so at present the advice is, in general terms, carry on as normal.
With regard to restrictions on travel and checks, I am afraid I have no in-depth knowledge and you might be better addressing your queries to the Department of Health.
Kind regards
Geoffrey
On 22 Mar 2020, at 09:30, Sue Killen wrote:
Dear Mr Quayle
Why are you still allowing coach loads of people to come to our Island?
They are not self-isolating for 14 days because the coaches are taking them all over the Island, and the people are spilling out in Ramsey and Peel and other places, their trip is usually only for 5 days anyway.
We had the chance to completely isolate ourselves from this dreadful disease and you and your government have tinkered at the edges of taking control.
You have not closed the pubs and restaurants but you have set up a snoopers charter to get people to grass on other folk rather than the government taking action.
You should only allow people who are resident on the island to come in and, especially with the holidays coming up, you need to tell those residents here they are not allowed to leave the Island. Close the port and airport. No passengers allowed in or out. Only food and essentials. Lock the Island down for a certain amount of time. People will moan and complain but that’s tough. You’ll be saving their lives.
Drastic action is the only way, even for a short period of time.
I have no confidence in you and your ministers. In fact I contacted my own MHK about a month ago and asked him various questions as to what the government were doing to
35 safeguard the Isle of Man and he referred me to the government briefings, which frankly looked like they had been cut and passed from the UK government briefing, and when I asked further questions he said it wasn’t his brief and i should contact the DOH myself! I can tell you this was Geoffrey Boot and I won’t be voting for him again.
With the Easter holidays coming there are people on the Island who are determined to carry on going as normal and going away. They should be warned if they do that they won’t get back until the lockdown is over.
Please do something more than just saying self-isolate when you come back. We do not have the capacity to cope with this disease.
ACT NOW, and save the Island and it’s people and be remembered as the Chief Minister who was strong and tough and and saved us all, not the Chief Ministet who worried about his own job and dithered.
COMETH THE HOUR COMETH THE MAN.
Yours very sincerely Mrs S Killen
From: Sue Killen Date: 23 March 2020 at 17:31:16 GMT To: Chief Minister Subject: Re: Coronavirus
Dear Mr Quayle
Thank you for carrying out the measures you enforced yesterday.
But if you had been in Peel or Laxey yesterday you would have thought nothing was happening, there were people everywhere. Sitting together on the promenades and in cafes/restaurants. Strolling around without a care in the world. Setting their faces against reality and putting the rest of us that are trying to adhere to the regulations in danger.
Please lockdown the port and airport from now, I fear there are too many people who will still leave the island, especially now that children are not at school. They have to be told that if they leave the Island now, having received the warning, then they will not be able to return until the lockdown is withdrawn. Sometimes shock tactics are the only way. To avoid this, lock the island down for a period of time and close the airport and port to outgoing passengers. I fully understand this is an exceptional system but it’s to save lives.
Yours sincerely Mrs S Killen
36 From: Sue Killen Date: 21 April 2020 at 20:11:15 GMT+1 To: Chief Minister Subject: Re: Coronavirus
Dear Mr Quayle
I sent you an email on 22 March with my concerns and your non-dealing of the Coronavirus situation.
I finished
COMETH THE HOUR, COMETH THE MAN
Well the HOUR CAME AND WENT AND YOU WEREN’T THE MAN!
How sad and frightening for us all.
Regards Mrs S Killen
37 38 Appendix 3: 29th April 2020 - Email from Nick Black, Chief Executive Officer, Department of Infrastructure, attaching slides from a virtual presentation to Members made on 27th April 2020
39 40 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:51:11 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 29 April 2020 20:29:32 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Subject: Fwd: DOI presentation- Monday 27th April Importance: Normal Attachments: Presentation to Tynwald Members 200422 final - without links.pdf ;
The Hon. Juan Watterson BA(Hons) BFP FRSA FCA FCMI CMgr SHK Speaker of the House of Keys Member for Rushen
Legislative Buildings Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW
[Contact details redacted]
Tynwald - The World’s Oldest Continuous Parliament
Sent from my mobile telephone- please forgive any typos!
------Forwarded message ------From: "Black, Nick" Date: Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:36 PM +0100 Subject: DOI presentation- Monday 27th April To: "All Tynwald Members and Contacts"
Dear Mr President, Dear Mr Speaker, Dear Members
Please find attached the slides that I spoke to in my virtual presentation to you on Monday.
I promised that I would send the link to the videos that could not be shown. My Comms colleagues have been able to edit them together so that only one link is needed.
The link is: https://youtu.be/-9CkpBB7Z2E
I will circulate the responses to the unanswered questions shortly.
Nick
Nick Black
Chief Executive
41 Department of Infrastructure Sea Terminal Building Douglas Isle of Man IM1 2RF
[Contact details redacted]
http://www.twitter.com/iominfra http://www.facebook.com/iominfrastructure
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
Cha nel kied currit da failleydagh ny jantagh erbee conaant y yannoo rish peiagh ny possan erbee lesh post-l er son Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh erbee jeh Reiltys Ellan Vannin dyn co-niartaghey scruit leayr veih Reireyder y Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh t’eh bentyn rish.
42 Presentation to Tynwald Members 200422 final - without links.pdf
The below slides were presented to Members of Tynwald via the Teams platform. The slides were used by the presenter as an aide memoire and may or may not be an accurate summary of the material that was actually presented to Tynwald Members.
43 Tynwald Members
Departmental Update: Infrastructure
20 April 2020
44 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Current operations and response
• Supporting the emergency response by increasing hospital capacity • Providing essential services • Assisting in repatriation • Preparing for the future/ reviewing Programme for Government
45 2 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Current operations: COVID-19
• Oxygen supplies • Hospital capacity • PPE stores • Repatriation • Emergency legislation
46 3 DOI Tynwald Members Update
PPU – Before - During - After
47 4 DOI Tynwald Members Update
PSA – Before - During - After
48 5 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Newlands – Before - During - After
49 6 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Current operations: essential services
• Hospital- engineering and property support • Buses- Sundays plus extra hospital service • Douglas Harbour- SPCO twice daily • Airport- supported operations • Waste Management- EFW, AWPP, CA, BB • Coastguard response • Diving operations
50 7 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Current operations: reconstruction
• Douglas Promenade refurbishment • Capital projects • Re-orientating DOI to meet the challenges
51 8 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Current operations: support for essential services
• Cleaning and caretaking • Fleet management • Highways • Housing • Local authority support • Commercial portfolio
52 9 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Next steps: COVID-19
• Continue to support other Departments in line with demand • Provide long term solutions as needed • Maintain readiness to step in to deliver key services such as delivery of food and fuel
53 10 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Next steps: essential services
• Buses- increase services as employment and education demand grows • Douglas Harbour- increased freight demand as construction restarts followed by passenger demand • Airport- core operations plus return of commercial services
54 11 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Next steps: reconstruction
• Accelerate capital program to help the economy • Maximise local spend where possible • Help economy to restart • Accelerate essential schemes- eg airport surface and drainage refurbishment • Revised Promenade Scheme • Help the visitor economy restart
55 12 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Next steps: Douglas Promenade Reconstruction
• Complete all works by end March 2021 • Reduce scope of works • Defer completion of some elements • Accept greater short term inconvenience • Add DOI workforce resource
56 13 DOI Tynwald Members Update
Thank you. Any questions?
57 14 58 Appendix 4: 29th April 2020- Email from Kate Lord-Brennan MLC
59 60 From: Lord-Brennan, Kate (MLC) Sent: 29 April 2020 22:51 To: Emergency Scrutiny Subject: Returners / Quarantine Policy / COMIS
My Q’s relate to quarantine policy /the COMIS, treatment/policy re returning residents vs those in the community and some medical buzzwords!
1. Why hasn’t government followed other countries in developing a properly articulated quarantine policy, which might include strict quarantine at a home address, with related conditions and sanctions? (Quarantine is not actually detailed in regulations or articulated in any policy / documents, and we are not seeing any differentiation in policy and law between self- isolation, and quarantine - why? ) (My email of 13th April below relates)
2. How much is the COMIS arrangement costing government – including security, food, securing area, staffing?
3. Why is the COMIS deemed the only appropriate and right quarantine mechanism for all, given there are varying needs / risks?
4. Returning residents have been described ( by Minister Ashford) as being managed in a clinically safe way – how is this so? What does this mean and what clinical / medical attention or checks do those in COMIS get?
5. Some stranded residents are very sick, elderly or vulnerable in other ways - Why have no changes been made as issues and appropriateness have come to light?
6. On what basis was the one hour outside / exercise thought appropriate? What consideration was given to the reality and impact of spending 23 hours locked in a hotel room, especially for young children?
7. What other options regarding quarantine on island for returning residents were rejected?
8. Why are residents on island diagnosed with covid19 treated / trusted differently to returning residents and allowed to stay at home?
9. Explain “viral load”, as it pertains to risk and the difference between on island and returning residents?
10. Explain “double bounce effect”
11. When did government first contact FCO to see about help for Manx residents along with other British citizens?
12. Who and what aspect of government is responsible for the development of this policy - DHSC, CABO or DOI as more recently stated in a media briefing ? Which minister
61 or political members recommended it ahead of submission to COMIN? Who designed the initiative?
13. Can you explain the difference between risk and transmission rates between a returning resident and a person on island who has tested positive for COVID 19? SEE HIGHTLIGHTED IN EMAIL BELOW
14. If someone is in strict quarantine at home (and does not leave their home) , explain how that is different, in terms of risk of transmission and in medical terms, to someone quarantined at COMIS?
15. Why are people who are returning to the island trusted less than those who have tested positive, or may be symptomatic, and are already on island? ( This has never been answered) What is the basis for difference of treatment and can you explain the key aspects that are different?
Best wishes, Kate
From: Lord-Brennan, Kate (MLC) Sent: 13 April 2020 20:22 To: Ashford, David (MHK) Cc: Chief Minister; Cannan, Alfred (MHK); Thomas, Chris (MHK); Boot, Geoffrey (MHK); Skelly, Laurence (MHK); Harmer, Ray (MHK); Allinson, Alex (MHK); Cregeen, Graham; Greenhow, Will Subject: Re: Returners / Quarantine Policy / COMIS
Thanks David - yes I saw the press briefing with below info and I do take your points and support the intention.
Obviously we have many people already on island self isolating with confirmed cases of the disease. Do we trust them more and the residents returning less?
I understand and support the mandatory quarantine 100% - it is just a case of where and how it is different to those isolating here, and if it is right and appropriate to have the COMIS solution for everyone and as the only quarantine mechanism for the entire duration of quarantine.
Please might you advise or find out : What is special about the controlled area of COMIS, in terms of mandatory quarantine? If the figures you state below are the same as if an asymptomatic person already on island is out and about. So - two unknown carriers are out and about, under existing measures, it will lead to 132 extra cases in a week? What are the figures then for someone fully quarantining at home (having exercised a choice between strict quarantine at home or enforced paid COMIS quarantine). How are people going to wash their things, their clothes etc - isn’t it actually much safer for some to do this in their own homes? Some don’t have good facilities of course and might be better in COMIS.
62 Will there be a concierge service to arrange for medicines and maybe things like fresh clothes and clean items / supplies for things like personal care? Or would family members drop these to the fence? Will they be given cleaning supplies to decontaminate their belongings after being away? Will housekeeping staff be protected?
Can’t we find a way to get people to their homes properly, after everything they have been through, and ensure compliance and safety in other ways, giving a bit of trust?
We must look at it through their eyes, and through the eyes of the public, as well as taking account of medical advice - and the boring practicalities.
Medical advice cannot take account of all the variables - it is unreasonable to expect it to and to expect them to fully include the broader view and consider all the “what ifs”.
I support the closure of the borders- as you know. This issue though is one of the elements that needs extra consideration, sensibility and sensitivity and therefore needs scope to adapt and flex and be sense checked, which is all I point out and ask.
I am happy to wait for a reply as things develop rather than have a quick response this evening. I appreciate there is much to consider in the round.
Thank you to everyone who has been working on all these aspects.
With thanks,
Kate
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Ashford, David (MHK) Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 7:01 pm To: Lord-Brennan, Kate (MLC) Cc: Chief Minister; Cannan, Alfred (MHK); Thomas, Chris (MHK); Boot, Geoffrey (MHK); Skelly, Laurence (MHK); Harmer, Ray (MHK); Allinson, Alex (MHK); Cregeen, Graham; Greenhow, Will Subject: Re: Returners / Quarantine Policy / COMIS
Dear Kate,
Without the mandatory quarantine in a controlled area the clinical body can’t support the borders reopening to residents. The medical modelling clearly shows that if even two returning residents of the 400 (0.5%) we know about were asymptomatic and breached the quarantine with the way the virus multiplies that would lead to a “double bounce effect” resulting in 132 additional cases in just one week and after just a few weeks would result, even using a low end multiplier, in 1000 potential extra cases in an additional causing serious issues for our health services and our ability to cope with demand. The current outbreak that we have in the community is so far on the evidence at a controllable level that is manageable with our health service resources, any second wave effect would not be and would result in
63 avoidable deaths in our community. So the alternative to mandatory quarantine is we leave the borders closed to all.
It is absolutely essential that returning residents are managed in a clinically safe way otherwise as per our medical modelling we risk exposing our community to a second wave of the virus that would put our case trajectory onto a similar track as that of Italy’s. I have attached the modelling graph which was shared with all members at last weeks briefing. The manageable line is the red line whereas our equivalent to Italy is the blue line. The green line is our current actual curve which as you will see is tracking currently towards the red but as you can see it would only take a small increase in infection rate to push us onto the blue line (Italy style) trajectory. That is why it is so crucial this is managed properly.
I realise this is a difficult and emotional time for many people particularly residents who got stranded abroad through no fault of their own and we all want people to be able to get home, but get home safely. If we do not do this in a clinically managed way the result is that a second wave of the virus will break out in our community which our health service will not be able to cope with and will result in avoidable deaths in our community which will be to the detriment of both residents already here and those returning.
All of the advice is kept under constant review and will be regularly re-examined but the clinical body is clear that under the current circumstances they can support any residents outside of the island returning is with mandatory quarantine. They are adamant that without this protection it risks a second wave effect and avoidable deaths in our community.
64 Hon. David Ashford MHK Minister for Health & Social Care MHK for Douglas North Legislative Buildings Finch Road Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW British Isles
House of Keys, a branch of Tynwald, the oldest continuous parliament in the world. The House of Keys is the elected branch of the Manx Parliament. The Isle of Man is an independent nation with its own laws, legislation and police force. It also has its own unique, very special and world renowned culture, language, history, heritage, wildlife and countryside.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 5:39 PM +0100, "Lord-Brennan, Kate (MLC) wrote:
Dear Minister Ashford & Council of Ministers,
Having looked at the news release, press briefing of today and observed the public and media comment on the above, as well as looking at the latest regs, I write to follow up with some queries, further to the commitment to keep the matter under review.
I agree that some returning residents will need official quarantine facilities (say where going home would pose a threat to other family members / occupants, or they don’t have, for other reasons, suitable accommodation ),but others would not necessarily need the fenced off compulsory and charged for COMIS accommodation - because they could, under strict and particular conditions that would demand full compliance, fully isolate at home, in order to secure public protection.
I wonder, as this policy evolves, will it be reviewed very soon to see about the differing ways in which Quarantine can be served, to take account of choice and individual circumstance, as well as protecting others?
Examples of measures from elsewhere are the Quarantine Order and the Stay at Home Notices brought in by the Singapore Government.
A Quarantine Order is the strictest among measure of those being suspected of carrying COVID-19. Quarantine usually occurs in the home, butcan also be served in dedicated Government Quarantine Facilities - so I suppose that is what the COMIS is becoming here.
Is it possible that similar measures, or a blend of such measures (which are similar to those we have in place via the Infections Persons Regs), together with an official quarantine facility (or facilities) might be better, fairer and more empathetic tools to deal with returning residents?
Also has it been taken into account, that such people who have been stranded, would be highly likely to comply with staying at home - even moreso than others self-isolating, since
65 home is where they will have been trying to get to for many weeks? Also, many will be running out of money and possibly even credit facility. These are all important factors.
I am just wondering about the balance and the provision and political sense check of medical advice.
Essentially- in the government and COMIN policy, is there space to bolster the utility of existing stay at home measures, by creating a proper quarantine policy, instead of espousing the mandatory stay at the COMIS, as truly the only option? I don’t believe that it is, though some may need and want to avail themselves of a dedicated facility, which is very important.
In regulation, can you blend together the existing provision under the potentially infected persons regs and the Entry Restrictions regs, to create appropriate requirements and sanctions for those returning to island to Quarantine?
Or better, provide for Quarantine measures under the Public Health Act?
As I write, it strikes me that as a concept, “Quarantine” needs fleshing out in both policy and regulation, to take account of individual circumstances, and to keep public confidence in measures across the community. Also, surely it should be possible to get some kind of undertaking, from returners, with some penalty attached to guarantee compliance?
In a quick review, I cannot find reference to “quarantine” in the Potentially Infected Persons Regs and only one reference in the latest Entry Restrictions regs -that is in relation to returners standing various costs, including food and accommodation costs during quarantine on island.
Is further developed / articulated thought on the quarantine concept / requirements imminent?
The info on Quarantine Orders I mention is here https://www.gov.sg/article/everything-you- need-to-know-about-quarantine-orders
It refers to severe penalties for non compliance and also monitoring of health, which I understand is a key facet of quarantine.
It is well articulated and something similar could be a useful aid in understanding, communication and critically, compliance, since matters of Quarantine, given the staggering of returns over many weeks, could go on when other aspects of island life are opening up and therefore may seem like an unfair penalty, in terms of liberty, cost and experience, to those residents who have not yet made it home- when the risk could be otherwise managed for some.
And ultimately, we are truly relying on social consciousness and “the stick” for not complying, in all the measures in place. Effectively, if there are not other methods of quarantine options, it is tantamount to being interned upon arrival - but where you have to pay. This could be the final straw for many, in various respects.
I hope there is an opportunity to nuance the policy in the coming days, and perhaps learn from the first tranch of returners and find a middle ground.
66
Maybe the policy is evolving and this is already on your radar for updating the current stated position.
In which case, I do apologise for drawing this to your attention further.
If there is an evolving policy, perhaps you might be in a position to indicate in the coming days, or outline for Members the other options looked at for returners and why the chosen option is definitely the only way re: Quarantine.
Kind regards,
Kate Get Outlook for iOS
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
67 68 Appendix 5: 15th to 30th April 2020 – Emails between Mr Speaker and Cabinet Office Returning Residents Team
69 70 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:57:08 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 30 April 2020 11:11:58 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Subject: FW: Repatriation Plans Importance: Normal
From: [Name redacted] Sent: 18 April 2020 15:25 To: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Cc: All Tynwald Members and Contacts Subject: RE: Repatriation Plans
Good afternoon Mr Speaker,
Apologies for not responding sooner to your enquiry, the matter of payments is being handled by the DoI, who have provided me with the following which I hope is helpful;
Only those on income related benefits, or students in receipt of an educational maintenance grant, will not be required to pay.
On contacting the DoI booking team they will seek to take a credit card payment for the full amount from all passengers unless they have been notified by the Cabinet Office that a person is in receipt of income related benefits, or a student in receipt of an Educational Maintenance Grant. All Major credit cards are accepted except American Express.
If the passenger is unable to make full payment then a £100 deposit will be required plus signed agreement to a Credit Card Mandate. This mandate sets out the requirement to pay £100 per month, charged on the anniversary date, to the same or alternative credit card until the full amount is paid off. The agreement has been drafted by the Attorney General’s Chambers and is enforceable under Manx Law.
Kind regards
[Name redacted]
From: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Sent: 16 April 2020 16:47 To: [Name redacted] Cc: All Tynwald Members and Contacts Subject: RE: Repatriation Plans
Dear [Name redacted]
Thanks for this. The FAQ states “Prior to travelling you will be asked to pay for the cost of your passage on the boat and your accommodation on the Island. Please note only those on income related benefits, or students in receipt of an educational maintenance grant, will not be required to pay.” However Minister
71 Ashford made a clear commitment that there was no requirement for upfront funding and that there would be long ‘time to pay’ arrangements. Can you confirm please?
Kind regards Juan
72 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:54:22 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 30 April 2020 11:09:41 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Subject: FW: Repatriation Plans Importance: Normal Attachments: Information for Returning Residents v1.0.pdf ;
From: [Name redacted] Sent: 16 April 2020 16:39 To: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Cc: All Tynwald Members and Contacts Subject: RE: Repatriation Plans
Dear Mr Speaker,
Thank you for your email enquiries yesterday. If I can take each of the areas that you have identified in turn?
Details are starting to emerge about how the process is going to work. It would be useful if CO published this when it was finalised.
· The CO has been finalising further information on the process and has put this onto the Covid-19 webpages this afternoon. I have attached a pdf copy for the information of Members. We have been refining and adding to the information as the process has developed. No doubt there will be further changes in the future as new issues are identified and raised, but hopefully it provides some clarity for people off Island and their relatives and friends.
I understand: 1. There is only one ferry per week which returning residents can travel on, this operates on a Wednesday 2. Every Friday there is a ballot, they will randomly pick out 30 people to travel on the following Wednesday sailing. 3. Returning residents will only be put into the ballot once they have arrived back in the UK and then contacted the returning resident department.
If this is correct, I presume that this is around hotel capacity, and there is sufficient space to separate two separate cohorts. Clearly if anyone becomes symptomatic in one cohort, the whole cohort has to stay locked down for a longer period. However, if there are two cohorts in the hotel, with adequate separation an illness in one cohort need not impact the other?
· There is one ferry a week, operating on Wednesdays. There was no need for a ballot for the ferry this week as the numbers who met the criteria for travel did not exceed the places available. There will need to be a ballot for the sailing next week however.
· The numbers are based on clinical advice as to how best to safely manage returns. Should any returning residents develop symptoms of the virus and require medical or hospital care, we need to ensure that there is sufficient medical resource available. Based on forecasting of the virus, if
73 larger numbers were accommodated on the boats, and hotel, this could put an unmanageable strain on our Island’s health services.
· People will have social distanced at all times and this includes arrangements that will be in place at the hotel. This means that if someone is confirmed COVID-19 positive during quarantine, they should not have been in close contact with anyone (staff or others in quarantine) and therefore neither the whole cohort nor staff will automatically have to extend quarantine/self-isolate as a result. Any extension to quarantine would apply to anyone who shares a room or to a group if there are interconnected rooms. Anyone testing positive during quarantine will be reported to the Contact Tracing team who will check that they have not had any close contacts beyond those with whom they share a room/interconnected rooms.
Can I suggest that ballots be done going out for a number of weeks in advance please? This will allow people to make accommodation plans (where people are living day-by-day at present).
· This is a new process, which we hope and plan on going smoothly. We are doing the first ballot, based on a random number selector, on Friday pm and will then notify people. We will however keep the process under review and it may be subject to further changes if they will be helpful to people seeking to return and deliverable in practical terms.
Linked with the above, I am concerned that people are not allowed on the ballot until they have returned to the UK. A person in a relatively safe country would be mad to come back to the Island with no guarantee of onward travel with the UK position being as bad as it is. If people around the world can go into the ballot it would increase fairness, and again allow people to plan flights and any necessary UK accommodation in preparation for their journey home.
· Government agreed to a process which required people to be present in the UK before they can be included in a ballot. In the current climate, it is going to be difficult for many people who are abroad to be certain that they will be present and available for travel to the IoM on a given date. It would be unfortunate if the relevant sailings had places which were unfilled, especially if there were Manx residents waiting in the UK who had not been allocated seats. Unfortunately the complexities of the arrangements would not make it possible for the Department of Infrastructure and the Steam Packet to substitute persons at short notice. This is an area however that we are going to continue to keep under active review as we cannot yet predict how the take up of places, even from those within the UK, will develop.
I have also had two contacts regarding the arrangements for pets if that can be confirmed in due course?
In respect of pets, the following advice is being given (please see the attached information also):
· Arrangements are in place to allow your animals to travel back with you, but you will have to make arrangements for them to be cared for in the Isle of Man when you return. You will not be permitted to bring your animals to the hotel. · Please advise the booking team when you call to arrange your travel and they will provide you with further information
I also understand that one person has had to put a £875 on a parent’s credit card to secure their journey back, before the payment plan was announced. I presume this person could get a refund to prevent significant credit card fees?
· I am afraid I cannot advise on any particular cases and what they might qualify for and from where. I understand that financial support is being looked at and that further information can be provided when people make their bookings to return to the IoM. As you know Minister Ashford
74 has said that anyone who is in receipt of benefits, or would qualify for benefits, does not have to pay and that for others arrangements can be made for payments over a period of time.
I hope that the above information is useful,
Kind regards
[Name redacted]
From: [Name redacted] Sent: 15 April 2020 15:50 To: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Cc: All Tynwald Members and Contacts Subject: RE: Repatriation Plans
Good afternoon Mr Speaker,
Thank you for your email. I will need to check on the details concerning some of the questions that you have raised and will respond as soon as possible,
Kind regards
[Name redacted]
From: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Sent: 15 April 2020 14:42 To: [Name redacted] Cc: All Tynwald Members and Contacts Subject: Repatriation Plans
Dear [Name redacted]
Details are starting to emerge about how the process is going to work. It would be useful if CO published this when it was finalised.
I understand: 1. There is only one ferry per week which returning residents can travel on, this operates on a Wednesday 2. Every Friday there is a ballot, they will randomly pick out 30 people to travel on the following Wednesday sailing. 3. Returning residents will only be put into the ballot once they have arrived back in the UK and then contacted the returning resident department.
If this is correct, I presume that this is around hotel capacity, and there is sufficient space to separate two separate cohorts. Clearly if anyone becomes symptomatic in one cohort, the whole cohort has to stay locked down for a longer period. However, if there are two cohorts in the hotel, with adequate separation an illness in one cohort need not impact the other?
Can I suggest that ballots be done going out for a number of weeks in advance please? This will allow people to make accommodation plans (where people are living day-by-day at present).
Linked with the above, I am concerned that people are not allowed on the ballot until they have returned to the UK. A person in a relatively safe country would be mad to come back to the Island with no guarantee of onward travel with the UK position being as bad as it is. If people around the world can go
75 into the ballot it would increase fairness, and again allow people to plan flights and any necessary UK accommodation in preparation for their journey home.
I have also had two contacts regarding the arrangements for pets if that can be confirmed in due course?
I also understand that one person has had to put a £875 on a parent’s credit card to secure their journey back, before the payment plan was announced. I presume this person could get a refund to prevent significant credit card fees?
Kind regards
Juan
The Hon. Juan Watterson BA(Hons) BFP FCA CMgr FCMI SHK Speaker of the House of Keys Member of the House of Keys for Rushen Legislative Buildings Douglas ISLE OF MAN IM1 3PW
[Contact details redacted] Twitter: @juanwatterson Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/juan.watterson
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
Cha nel kied currit da failleydagh ny jantagh erbee conaant y yannoo rish peiagh ny possan erbee lesh post-l er son Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh erbee jeh Reiltys Ellan Vannin dyn co-niartaghey scruit leayr veih Reireyder y Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh t’eh bentyn rish.
76 COVID-19: Isle of Man Border Controls
Information for Returning Residents
The Isle of Man’s borders are now closed to passengers, and this came into effect from 6am on Friday 27 March 2020.
The Isle of Man Government has implemented The Emergency Powers (Coronavirus) (Entry Restrictions) Regulations 2020 to allow Isle of Man residents to return under specific circumstances.
If you are a returning resident who meets the following criteria You are a resident of the Island; You did not leave the Island on or after 6 a.m. on 27 March 2020;
Under these regulations you can return to the Island via specially designated transport, providing you are not displaying any symptoms of Covid 19.
When you arrive in the Isle of Man you will be required to observe a mandatory quarantine period of 14 days. You’ll be provided with suitable accommodation to stay in during this period and will need to complete the 14 day period before travelling anywhere on the Island (including your home).
Please be aware that the process of repatriation will take some time. Please be patient with us whilst we process your application and ensure that you read and follow the below advice carefully to minimise your frustration and ensure we can act as quickly as possible
We understand that this is a difficult time for you and you may be feeling anxious or frustrated. We are here to help you with any queries you may have.
If you have any queries please contact [email protected] and we will respond to you as soon as possible
Kind regards Returning Residents Team
Page 1 of 5
77 Advice for Returning Travellers
What do I need to do now? You need to complete the repatriation form which can be found at: https://covid19.gov.im/returningresidents. Whilst completing this form you will be asked a number of questions to give us a clear understanding of your circumstances. This will include questions about any medical conditions you may have. If you are overseas you need to return to the UK if commercial flights are available. If no commercial flights are available you need to visit www.gov.uk/guidance/travel-advice-novel-coronavirus and follow the UK Government’s instructions, which will vary dependent on which country you are in.
What will happen after that? Once we have processed your information and confirmed that you are a Manx resident we will put you forward for the next available sailing. If there are more applications for this sailing than there are seats, a random ballot will be conducted to assign seats. If you are assigned a seat, we will issue you with a draft exemption to travel under the Emergency Powers (Coronavirus) (Entry Restrictions) (Amendment No.3) Regulations 2020. This may take some time so we ask that you are patient. Prior to travelling you will be asked to pay for the cost of your passage on the boat and your accommodation on the Island. Please note only those on income related benefits, or students in receipt of an educational maintenance grant, will not be required to pay. At the time of booking you will need to confirm any specific requirements for the sailing e.g. a vehicle, and for the accommodation e.g. accessible room, interconnected rooms for families, highchair/cot, and any dietary requirements. These will be provided wherever possible. You will be sent a confirmation with the date of designated sailing and the time you need to arrive at Heysham Port. You will need to ensure you arrive in good time for your sailing. We are aware that public transport is limited between Heysham and Lancaster therefore information will be provided on a coach that will be available on the Wednesday morning of your sailing to collect passengers from Manchester Piccadilly Station. Sufficient transport will be provided to allow social distancing to be achieved. You will need to arrange for any other transport and your accommodation in the UK until your designated boat departs.
What will happen when I arrive in Heysham? If you feel unwell in any way that could be related to the COVID19 virus do not attempt to travel. When you arrive at Heysham Port you will need to undergo a health check. If you are not deemed fit to travel you will not be allowed to board the boat. If
Page 2 of 5
78 this happens, information will be provided to support you with your next steps. The health professional carrying out your assessment will provide information on what to do should you develop any symptoms of coronavirus during your quarantine period. If you have a car, once your health check is complete, you need to remain in the vehicle and will be directed to board in the usual way. Once parked on the boat you must wait in your vehicle until you are escorted to a designated area. If you are a foot passenger you must wait in the terminal, or on the coach, where you will be required to maintain social distancing. You will be responsible for your own luggage and will need to deposit it on a coach and then board. You will then be driven onto the boat and wait on the coach until you are called and escorted to a designated area. If you have let us know in advance that you require assistance this will be provided by staff.
What about my animals Arrangements are in place to allow your animals to travel back with you, but you will have to make arrangements for them to be cared for in the Isle of Man when you return. You will not be permitted to bring your animals to the hotel. Please advise the booking team when you call to arrange your travel and they will provide you with further information.
What will happen on the boat? You will need to remain in a designated area throughout the journey, apart from to access the toilet. Water and snacks will be provided. Please note you will not be able to purchase other refreshments.
What will happen when I arrive in the Isle of Man? If you are a foot passenger you’ll be escorted back to the coach, which will take you to your accommodation. If you have a car you will be escorted back to your vehicle and will be required to drive it to the designated accommodation where secure parking will be available. You must go straight to the designated accommodation.
What will happen when I arrive at the hotel? If you have a car you will need to wait in the vehicle, if you arrive on a coach you will be held on the coach. People will disembark by room, they will be issued with a direction from the Department from Health and Social Care, under the Emergency Powers Potentially Infectious Persons Regulations 2020. This will tell you what you need to do during the mandatory quarantine and the penalties in place if you breach any of the conditions. You will need to sign the direction and will be given a copy. You will be given a room key and will be shown to your room.
Page 3 of 5
79 What will happen during the 14 day quarantine period? The hotel will provide appropriate facilities for you to complete the mandatory quarantine period. You’ll have to remain in your room for 14 days except for a specific time designated to you for a brief period of exercise each day. This will take place in a designated area. The hotel will have all of the amenities and services you’ll need during your stay. It will be safe and hygienic and there will be internet and laundry facilities available. Three meals a day will be provided to you in your room. Replacement bedding and towels will be provided at least once a week. You will be provided with essential cleaning products to clean your room. You will be able to pay for extras yourself e.g. soft drinks, snacks, laundry directly by calling the hotel reception. Strict social distancing must be adhered to whilst exercising and when moving through the hotel. Should you have health needs, for example prescriptions for regular medications, arrangements will be made to facilitate these requirements. These arrangements will be enforced by 24 hour security staff. The Police will also be visiting the accommodation on a regular basis.
Can my family and friends come to visit or bring me supplies? We understand that your families and friends will want to see you when you return to the Isle of Man, but to make sure everyone is kept safe, this will not be possible. It will not be possible for people to come to either the Sea Terminal or the hotel to see you. You’ll be transferred to hotels directly. You’ll then be able to contact your loved ones on-line or by phone. There will be laundry facilities at the hotel and you will be able to purchase essential items e.g. toiletries through the hotel.
Can I order food for delivery? To maintain the integrity of the quarantine period, you will not be able to order food for delivery and the security team will not be able to allow delivery drivers onto the hotel grounds. However, the hotel will supply three meals a day for you and you will be able to purchase snacks and drinks.
Any other questions or concerns? We hope that the above advice gives you a good overview and covers the main points of information you need regarding this process. However, we understand that this is a challenging time with many individual circumstances that you may need to explore. We are here to help you with any queries you may have.
Below are some answers to the most common questions we have received. If the answer to your question is not provided for above or below, please email [email protected] with your specific question and we will respond to you as soon as possible.
Page 4 of 5
80 Frequently Asked Questions
Why can’t I just go home and self-isolate there?
Without the mandatory quarantine in a controlled area the clinical body advising the Government cannot support the borders reopening for Isle of Man residents wishing to return home. The medical modelling clearly shows that if even two of the 400 residents wishing to return home (0.5% of the Island’s population) were asymptomatic and breached the quarantine, with the way the virus multiplies that would lead to a “double bounce effect”. This would result in 132 additional cases of coronavirus in just one week and after two weeks would result, even using a low end multiplier, in 1000 potential extra cases. This could cause serious issues for our health services and the Island’s ability to cope with health care demand.
The current outbreak is at a controllable level that is manageable with our health service resources. Any second wave effect would not be controllable and would result in avoidable deaths in our community. So the alternative to mandatory quarantine is we leave the borders closed to all.
It is absolutely essential that returning residents are managed in a clinically safe way otherwise as per our medical modelling we risk exposing our community to a second wave of the virus that would put our case trajectory onto a similar track as that of Italy’s. That is why it is so crucial this is managed properly.
We realise this is a difficult and emotional time for many people, particularly residents who got stranded abroad through no fault of their own and we all want people to be able to get home, but get home safely.
Why aren’t we accommodating more people on each boat trip?
This is based on clinical advice. We need to ensure that, should any returning residents develop symptoms of the virus and require medical or hospital care, that there is sufficient medical resource available. Based on forecasting of the virus, if larger numbers were accommodated on the boat, and hotel, this could put an unmanageable strain on our Island’s health services.
How is the priority for returning been established?
Everyone is a priority to us and we appreciate that everyone wants to return home for a very broad variety of reasons. We are doing everything we can to get all residents home as quickly as possible. On that basis, we are selecting people based on the following criteria:
already being in the UK not displaying symptoms of Covid-19 who left the Island before 6am on 27 March
This is part of successfully completing the application process. Once these criteria have been met, a random ballot selection process is taking place to give equal priority to all.
The only exception to this, is to prioritise any unaccompanied minor seeking to repatriate.
Page 5 of 5
81 82 Appendix 6: 28th & 29th April 2020 - Emails between a resident and Cabinet Office Returning Residents Team
83 84 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:59:38 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 30 April 2020 11:48:34 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Cc: [Jane Poole-Wilson; Rob Callister; Chris Robertshaw; Joann Corkish Subject: FW: Repatriation Application Importance: Normal Attachments:
From: Returning Resident Queries Sent: 29 April 2020 12:29 To: [Contact details redacted] Cc: Skelly, Laurence (MHK); Shimmins, Bill (MHK); Watterson, Juan (SHK) Subject: FW: Repatriation Application
Dear [Names redacted]
Thank you for your email.
I attached a copy of the booking form which is given to returning residents to sign when they are ready to return to the island.
I hope this of assistance, but if you would like any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best wishes
[Contact details redacted]
Sent on behalf of the Returning Residents Team A team is available to respond to any questions you may have and they can be contacted on [email protected] Monday – Friday between the hours of 9.00am and 4.00pm (GMT). Helpful links Isle of Man Government Official Website: https://covid19.gov.im/ The Emergency Powers (Coronavirus) (Entry Restrictions) Regulations 2020: http://www.tynwald.org.im/links/tls/SD/2020/2020-SD-0226.pdf The Returning Residents correspondence
From: [Name redacted] Sent: 28 April 2020 13:06 To: [Name redacted] Cc: [Name redacted] Skelly, Laurence (MHK); Shimmins, Bill (MHK); Watterson, Juan (SHK) Subject: Re: Repatriation Application
85 Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links. Dear [Name redacted]
Thank you for your email.
We have exchanged a number of emails with your colleague,[Name redacted] , regarding our location and situation. She will be able to update you.
As far as we know we have completed the required forms and satisfied the residency requirements. Please advise if this is not the case.
We are registered with the FCO in Canberra.
We understand that there is a form, which is mentioned in the Regulations, to sign when we arrive on the Island. We would be grateful if you could email us a copy in order that we can understand anything further that may be required of us before we arrive.
Best regards. Stay safe.
[Names redacted]
On Tuesday, 28 April 2020, 11:03:59 UTC,[Name redacted] wrote:
Dear [Names redacted] Thank you for your repatriation application. According to our records, when you applied for repatriation you advised that you were still outside of the UK. We just wanted to get in touch with a reminder to please let us know as soon as you arrive back in the UK, so that you may be included in the consideration for sailings back to the Isle of Man. The repatriation process is continuing subject to advice from the Department for Health and Social Care. If the risk to the Island’s population is considered too great, then the numbers repatriated on each sailing may have to be changed. There are a number of eligibility criteria that must be met for your application to progress, including the residency requirements as stated in the Emergency Powers (Corona Virus) (Entry Restrictions) (Amendment Number 2) 2020. Do please let us know if you have any questions about these, we will do our best to assist you. If you haven’t already done so, you should contact the local British Embassy and the Foreign Commonwealth Office who can support you whilst you are overseas. If you have any queries about this email, please contact us on [email protected] Kind regards, [Name redacted] Sent on behalf of the returning residents team.
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
86 Manx Home Booking Form 3.docx
87 ManxHome Booking Form
Accessibility requirements Medical Allergies/Dietary Exemption Surname First Name Title DOB Cot/Highchair Requirements requirements Number etc.
*Adult >16, Child 3-15yrs, Infant <3
Phone No.:______Email:______Confirmed all of the above are currently in the UK: Yes / No Location: ______Place of collection: Hotel Indigo, Manchester Victoria (Todd Steet) 09:00 Lancaster Station (Station Road) 10:30 Heysham Port 11:00 Does the client have a vehicle that they wish to bring back to the island? Y / N Car Registration: ______Car Make/Model: ______
Please Confirm No and Type of Pets Travelling: ______(Wherever possible pets should remain in cars – there are some kennels available on the boat)
Name of Designated Person/Company collecting pet from Douglas Port: ______Existing Steam Packet Booking Reference No (which the client was unable to use) ______Anticipated Date of Travel:______(Office to complete) No. of Hotel Indigo rooms required: _____ Double ___ Twin (busvannin use only) No. Comis Hotel rooms required: ___ Double ___ Twin ___ Interconnected At the time of booking the client has been made aware that:
They must be at the agreed meeting point at the correct time and date
They will be refused travel if showing symptoms of Covid19
Coach journeys are subject to Tours IOM’s conditions
Sea journeys are subject to Steam Packet Company’s conditions
Where applicable the pet must be transferred to the kennels at Douglas Port to be collected
During their stay at the Comis Hotel they must comply with the Direction issued by the Department of Health and Social Care
Their hotel stay is subject to Comis Hotel’s conditions
One parcel (cabin bag size) can be delivered to the Comis Hotel after the guest has arrived by a named person at an agreed time
This information will be shared with the Cabinet Office, SPCO, Comis Hotel, and the Tours Isle of Man, and will be held by Isle of Man Transport for the purposes of managing this booking
1
88 ManxHome Booking Form Journey details will be sent via email once payment is completed and all relevant information is in place
The payment receipt will be sent to the registered address of the card
Credit Card Information Please remember to stop call recording while taking payment information. (note we cannot accept American Express, or Electron) Card Number ______Name on Card ______
Registered Address ______
Start Date _ _ / _ _ Expiry _ _ / _ _ Security Code _ _ _
Total Amount to be Paid: £______
Card Payment Authorisation No: ______(to be completed after payment complete)
Coach Seat Number Boat Seating Area Comis Hotel Room Number
Menu Choices (Wednesday Evening
Starter Main Course Dessert
Booking taken by: ______Booking Date: ______Trapeze Booking Ref: ______Details entered onto spreadsheet Travel Details sent
2
89 90 Appendix 7: 30th April 2020 – Email from Mike Dean
91 92 Archived: 30 April 2020 15:00:16 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 30 April 2020 12:34:33 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Cc: [Name redacted] Subject: Fwd: IoM residents repatriation Importance: Normal Attachments: Repatriation Timeline and Narative.doc ;
The Hon. Juan Watterson BA(Hons) BFP FRSA FCA FCMI CMgr SHK Speaker of the House of Keys Member for Rushen
Legislative Buildings Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW
[Contact details redacted] Twitter: @juanwatterson
Tynwald - The World’s Oldest Continuous Parliament
Sent from my mobile telephone- please forgive any typos!
------Forwarded message ------From: [Contact details redacted] Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:21 PM +0100 Subject: IoM residents repatriation To: "Watterson, Juan (SHK)"
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Hi Juan, I hope this finds you well.
I am Mike Dean. I was released from the Comis Hotel on Wednesday as part of the first batch of IoM returnees.
I note that will chairing the Tynwald committees which will be assessing the Government's handling of the current COVID crisis., which I have to say that in the main has been done well.
I am writing to you specifically about the handling of the residents who were trapped abroad after the IoM closed its border on 27th March, as unfortunately I have first hand experience! I was
93 trapped in India along with Alan Bell after it closed its border on 22nd March. We eventually managed to get a repatriation flight to the UK and then had to spend a week in a tent as we could not get any accommodation. Three very unpleasant and insecure weeks. We then got the seacat to the IoM and the Comis. Our trials and tribulations are well documented in interviews with the BBC, Manx Radio and ITV, plus others.
Let me say that I, like the vast majority of the Manx population, was entirely in favour of the border closure. But I was appalled that no thought had been given to residents trapped abroad. Government correctly said that the UK FCO was responsible for Manx residents abroad, however they seemed to use it as a convenient shield to abrogate its responsibilities.
My anger at the way we were being treated started when I read that the Chief Minister stated on 27th March that there were less than twenty residents were trapped abroad and that his office was in touch with them with a view to offering support. Neither statement was true, there were far more than twenty and no support was offered. At this point I must bring up the letter to the Minister from the DHSC on 2nd April saying that they had been asked to assess the problems if 2,000 residents were to return to the IoM. Who on earth gave them that figure? The letter then said they had been asked to assess the situation on 200, a far more realistic figure.
On the 27th March I wrote to the CMs office stating my position and asking what support was available. The full transcripts of my correspondence can be found in the attached document. But to summarise:
[Name redacted] replied to me on the 28th saying: We are currently compiling a list of residents who seek to return to the I and will put you and Alan on it. I am expecting an announcement shortly what measures will be put in place when IoM residents who are currently abroad return to the UK...as soon as I have any news i will contact you to pass on information.
I wrote to him again on 1st April asking what progress had been made. He replied the same day saying: Sincere apologies for not replying...we are currently not in a position to advise you what measures will be in place when IoM residents who are currently abroad return to the UK...as soon as I hear any news I will be in touch with you.
I wrote again on 3rd April asking for an update. No further responses received.
Alan and I wrote to four MHKs: Clare Barber, Chris Robertshaw, Bill Shimmins and David Ashford and received far more positive and helpful information and support.
To move on to the Comis and quarantine. When we arrived on the IoM we were were greeted by an unbelievable over the top reception. There were more police and security guards present at the port and the Comis than returnees. There was no one present from Government or DHSC.
During our stay at the Comis we were allowed out for exercise for only one hour. We allowed only one outside delivery in the two weeks which must not contain drink or food. We were being treated like criminals. Human Rights? If we complained we were told that instructions came from the CMs office. Where were representatives of the CMs office. Nowhere to be seen.
Whilst we were in the Comis were treated well and the hotel and security staff were friendly and helpful. Did we hear from or see anyone from Government or DHSC? No! We're tested? No! We were supposed to be a severe risk to the Island yet the authorities did absolutely nothing. Extraordinary! What a waste of money! The only testing we ever had was a temperature check at Heysham by a nurse.
94 So we left the Comis on Wednesday without seeing or hearing from anyone from Government or the DHSC. This wonderful experience has cost me and the others nearly £1,000 each. There were far better ways to have handled the situation.
The attached document I referred to above is a timeline and narrative of the handling of the repatriation process I have been compiling. It is factual based on press reports, Government PR statements and Tynwald reports. I make no personal comments except where I have been interviewed. I have yet to put in the transcript of Tynwald proceedings of 30th March, but as you were there I guess I do not need to!
I will be adding to this document as matters progress.
Should you require further information from me please get in touch.
All the best and take care.
Mike
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
Cha nel kied currit da failleydagh ny jantagh erbee conaant y yannoo rish peiagh ny possan erbee lesh post-l er son Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh erbee jeh Reiltys Ellan Vannin dyn co-niartaghey scruit leayr veih Reireyder y Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh t’eh bentyn rish.
95 Repatriation Timeline and Narative.doc
96 Isle of Man Border closure due to COVID 19
And Repatriation of IoM Residents
The Isle of Man closed its border at 9.00 on 23rd March
22nd March
Isle of Man Government's press release (Precis)
The Isle of Man is to close its borders to non residents from 9.00am on Monday 23rd March to help contain the spread of COVID-19. This measure is based on clinical advice. Only people resident on the IoM will be able to enter IoM with checks being made at sea and airports. Exceptions will be made for the small number of vital people necessary to keep the Island running.
Chief Minister Howard Quayle stated "This includes closing our borders to anyone who isn't normally resident here. People who live on the Island will be able to return home and adhere to the new lawn on mandatory self isolation for fourteen days."
23rd March
IoM Government news release
Residents returning time Island need to plan carefully
Any Isle of Man resident who wishes to get back to the Island should plan their travel carefully.
The Isle of Man Government has been advised that easyJet services to the Island will finish tonight (23 March 2020) and that Aer Lingus Regional flights to Dublin will finish tomorrow (24 March 2020).
Whilst the Government is confident that flights operated by Loganair will continue, it is possible that some airports in the UK may close which could cause some disruption to schedules.
The Isle of Man Steam Packet Company continues to operate regular services to Heysham.
Any resident returning to the Isle of Man is required to adhere to the new law on mandatory self- isolation for 14 days, regardless of whether or not they have symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19).
27th March
Manx Radio
Fewer than twenty people stranded abroad says Chief Minister - we are in touch will them all
97 The Chief Minister has told Tynwald that fewer than twenty people have been left stranded off Island following the lockdown announced this week. Howard Quayle says that Cabinet Office is in contact with all those affected and is working to offer support.
31st March
BBC
Stranded Manx people "feel abandoned" after border closure says MHK
The Manx border was closed last week for at least 21 days
People from the Isle of Man stuck abroad during the coronavirus pandemic "feel abandoned" after the island's border was closed, an MHK has said.
Bill Shimmins told the Manx parliament that stranded residents felt “angry” and “frightened” by the move.
More than 100 people were left unable to return home to the island following the border closure on Friday morning.
Chief Minister Howard Quayle said the decision had been “horrendously tough” but had been made to "save lives".
The step had been taken on the advice of the island's medics to prevent demand at Noble's Hospital going “through the peak of medical capacity”, he added.
A further 11 positive cases of coronavirus were recorded on the Isle of Man on Tuesday, while a third patient was hospitalised.
The total number of cases on the island now stands at 60.
An extraordinary sitting of Tynwald was held on Tuesday to approve several pieces of emergency coronavirus legislation, including the restrictions on entry to the island.
Mr Quayle told politicians the government was aware of 17 island residents currently stranded in the UK and another 88 "further afield" in countries including Australia, India and Russia.
Mr Shimmins said: "They see what every other country in the world is doing and they feel badly let down.
"They've had several flights cancelled and no refunds. They have no money, they're worried, they're frightened."
Talks had taken place with the Foreign Office to ensure Manx residents were “entitled” to get on repatriation flights to the UK, Mr Quayle said.
98 The government was looking at ways to support those “isolated off the island” and would arrange return travel "once our medics feel reassured that is it safe" to do so, he added.
The restrictions on travel to the island were brought in for an initial period of 21 days.
31st March
Manx Radio
IoM Government to stranded Manx travellers: "Sorry we will not help you"
Those stuck abroad feeling '"desperate and abandoned."
Manx travellers who have been left stranded after the Island closed its borders last week, have been told by the government 'we will not help you'.
Emails shared with Manx Radio shows advice from the Cabinet Office is directing those stuck abroad to now contact the UK Foreign Office.
Chief Minister Howard Quayle gave Manx travellers 48 hours notice of the last boat from Heysham on 6am Friday before the Island's borders would be closed to all passengers, regardless of whether they were a resident.
It is now understood that a number of people missed that cut off point and have been locked out of the for the next 21 days.
As a result, the government says in the region of 20 Manx residents have been in contact with them seeking support.
Manx Radio has spoken to residents stuck in India to South East Asia where social restrictions are limiting access to food and medication let alone outbound travel.
Mark in Thailand, who was aware of the Island's border situation had rescheduled a return flight to Heathrow.
Though, with domestic flights grounded in the UK, his plan to drive a hire car up to Heysham for the last sailing were dashed as timings meant he could only get there by Friday night at the very earliest.
It was then that he took the advice of his travel insurance company to stay in Thailand, a country which is under a 7am to 7pm military curfew, as he would in fact be homeless if he got back to the UK.
This is conflicting advice from the Chief Minister’s office, which told him to return to the UK.
So he says, he feels 'abandoned' and 'forgotten' by the Manx government.
There is also concern for a couple in Goa where there are reports of a food shortage which is leading to civil unrest.
99 UK commercial flights in and out of India have been stopped and aren't set to resume until the middle of April.
'Rescue flights'
The Island’s jurisdiction over its travellers during a time of crisis has always been limited as the real practical and logistical support lies with the UK Foreign Office.
In an announcement yesterday, the Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab struck a deal with a number of airlines to go ahead with a package of so-called ‘rescue flights'.
This would involve the repatriation of ‘hundreds of thousands of British people’.
Initially, the Foreign Office will target a number of priority countries where travel restrictions and indeed commercial flights have been stopped leaving a substantial amount of British citizens stranded.
It’s now likely that Manx people with access to a British Embassy will be able to get a seat on those planes back to the UK, if they make themselves known at the earliest opportunity.
However, as the UK is in a state of lockdown, Manx travellers will be returning to a country where all the hotels are shut.
For some, they may have to make the difficult decision then to stay put where they have access to accommodation and like many of us, wait this virus out in isolation
In light of this announcement, Manx Radio contacted the Isle of Man Government.
A spokesperson said 'that any person coming into the Island is at risk of carrying Covid-19 and therefore presents a serious threat to our population and healthcare system.
'Anyone who is outside of the UK should contact the FCO for relevant advice and support.'
------
Michael Dean's e-mail correspondence with Chief Minister's Office
27th March Michael Dean to Chief Minister's Office
(Using on line form) I have just read that the Chief Minister has stated that there are fewer than twenty Island residents stranded off Island and that his office was in touch with them all offering advice and support. Alan Bell and I are currently stranded off Island in Goa and unable to return to IoM.
28th March from[Name redacted] Chief Minister's Office
I am sorry to hear that you and Alan are currently unable to return to IoM. We are compiling a list of IoM residents who are seeking to return to the Island but are unfortunately unable to do so at present and I will include you and Alan on the list together with your contact details. We are anticipating an
100 announcement regarding advice and support for those residents currently off Island and will be in touch with you shortly.
1st April to[Name redacted] Chief Minister's Office
Hi[Name redacted] . Further to my message earlier today.
The UK, Germany, France, Scandinavia, Israel ... I could go on and on ... are repatriating their citizens. Not the IoM, they are abandoning them.
I have also listened to the debate in Tynwald. It was stated that the IoM should have an isolation centre such as Singapore. That is totally not needed. We, as I stated before, self isolate for the required period of time.
To repeat. We board the Steam Packet, put into isolation, not coming into contact with fellow passengers and crew. We disembark at Douglas and get into our own transport which will be left for us and go into self isolation.
Finally, you will recall that in got in touch with you after I read that the Chief Minister stated that there were only twenty residents stranded and they were being offered advice and support. You now know that there are more than one hundred.
And you have offered NO advice or support. In fact the absolute opposite.
1st April Chief Minister's Office to Michael Dean
I have forwarded your message to the Chief Minister and hopefully his office will be in touch with you shortly.
[Name redacted]
NO CONTACT RECEIVED FROM CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE
1st April Michael Dean to Chief Minister's Office
Hi[Name redacted] further to previous correspondence.
The situation here in Goa is now pretty desperate. We have been in lockdown for nearly two weeks. I should point out that lockdown here is far tougher than IoM or UK. All shops except pharmacies are shut. Police and troops on street enforcing the lockdown, in some cases with violence. Obtaining food is very difficult.
We have now heard from the FCO that they are arranging emergency repatriation flights to the UK in the next few days and we have no option but to take it. We don't know where we will land but wherever that is we will be homeless with no where to stay.
101 The IoM has closed its borders. But the Steam Packet is still running and there are flights from three airports to the Island for "essential workers". Why can't we and others being repatriated to the UK and then homeless be allowed on board. For example, if we went on the Steam Packet we could be dislocated from other passengers and crewmen. (We have to intents and purposes been in self isolation here for two week). When we arrive in Douglas we would have our own transport left for us do drive home for the required self isolation period.
We are in a desperate situation. What is happening? From what I read in the press it appears that the government is prepared to abandon its stranded residents.
1st April Reply from Chief Minister's Office
Thank you for sending the update on your situation in Goa. I’m really sorry to hear that the situation you and Allan are in has deteriorated even more in the past few days.
I’ll also forward your email to the Chief Minister so that he has the clearest picture of your plight.
Sincere apologies for my not currently being in a position to advise you regarding what measures will be in place when Isle of Man residents who are currently abroad return to the UK. The advice is for UK citizens to return as soon as possible if they are currently abroad and if they are in a position to do so. As soon as I hear any news on the repatriation of Manx residents to the Island from the UK I will contact you immediately to pass on the information.
Many thanks and best wishes.
[Name redacted]
3rd April Michael Dean to Chief Minister's Office
Just watched from Goa the Chief Minister's press briefing. He again stated that government were offering support to all those stranded off Island. Really, WHERE IS IT?
NO REPLY FROM CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE
------
29th March - 3rd April
Alan Bell and Mike Dean communicated with four MHKs who were sympathetic with the plight of residents stranded abroad:
Bill Shimmins
Clare Barber
David Ashford
102 Chris Robertshaw
In reply to an email from Mike Dean, Chris Robertshaw wrote:
"You are right, the decision to close the border was the right one but draconian in regards to homecommers. The issue is to how to resolve very quickly the situation regarding the protocols for homecommers.
"When the issue was raised in Tynwald on Tuesday Howard was adamant that the door stays shut. I agreed it was the right thing to do but asked him if he would go back to the medics to see if a safe return policy could be put together to assist those still not back. (He needed an exit door from the his too dogmatic position so I gave it to him without him loosing face. Fortunately he does now seem to be following this path so I hope we will see some resolution soon."
Attached to this e-mail was the letter from Department of Health and Social Care to the Health Minister, David Ashford, regarding repatriation. See below - date 2nd April.
31st March
Manx Radio
"It's not heroic to abandon our own people"- MHK (Refer to Hansard report following)
A Tynwald member has criticised the government's decision to block the return of stranded Manx residents during its coronavirus lockdown.
MHK Bill Shimmins urged the government to rethink the policy and fast-track a quarantine facility for these residents, a measure similar to Singapore.
It was in response to the chief minister's move to seek approval of further emergency powers to keep the borders closed:
The chief minister says the decision to close our borders wasn't made on a whim.
31st March
BBC - Manx people stuck abroad feel abandoned and frightened says MHK (Refer to Hansard report following)
The Manx border was closed last week for at least 21 days
People from the Isle of Man stuck abroad during the coronavirus pandemic "feel abandoned" after the island's border was closed, an MHK has said.
Bill Shimmins told the Manx parliament that stranded residents felt “angry” and “frightened” by the move.
103 More than 100 people were left unable to return home to the island following the border closure on Friday morning.
Chief Minister Howard Quayle said the decision had been “horrendously tough” but had been made to "save lives".
The step had been taken on the advice of the island's medics to prevent demand at Noble's Hospital going “through the peak of medical capacity”, he added.
A further 11 positive cases of coronavirus were recorded on the Isle of Man on Tuesday, while a third patient was hospitalised.
The total number of cases on the island now stands at 60.
An extraordinary sitting of Tynwald was held on Tuesday to approve several pieces of emergency coronavirus legislation, including the restrictions on entry to the island.
Mr Quayle told politicians the government was aware of 17 island residents currently stranded in the UK and another 88 "further afield" in countries including Australia, India and Russia.
Mr Shimmins said: "They see what every other country in the world is doing and they feel badly let down.
"They've had several flights cancelled and no refunds. They have no money, they're worried, they're frightened."
Talks had taken place with the Foreign Office to ensure Manx residents were “entitled” to get on repatriation flights to the UK, Mr Quayle said.
The government was looking at ways to support those “isolated off the island” and would arrange return travel "once our medics feel reassured that is it safe" to do so, he added.
31st March
Tynwald debate on Emergency Powers and repatriation of residents. Precis of Hansard
Text to follow xxxxxxxxxxxx
1st April
Manx Radio
"The Isle of Man has abandoned us, simple as that" Interview With Mike Dean and Alan Bell
Stranded Manx pair issue hopeful plea to government
The government has been urged to show some 'imagination' to ensure the safe return of stranded Manx people back to the Island.
104 It was revealed in Tynwald yesterday, that the number of Manx people claiming to be stranded abroad has now risen to over hundred.
Two of them are Allan Bell and Mike Dean, Island residents who have been enduring a strict lockdown in Goa for 9 days.
In India, the suspension of all commercial flights in and out of the country was announced last week, leaving both Allan and Mike unable to get back to the Island ahead of the full border closure on Friday (26 Mar).
As the tourist resorts have shut their doors, the pair are now staying in isolation with a local family.
Social restrictions are in place meaning they can only make essential trips for food and medicine, with the state's roads reserved for supply and delivery vehicles, measures which are enforced by the military.
Though Mike, who flew out to join Allan a few weeks ago, says there is an increased feeling of hostility towards tourists with fears of a food shortage and even civil unrest.
'We have to get out'
Allan left the Island on 5 January, before the WHO had identified coronavirus as COVID-19 and before the first recorded death in China.
Travel advice remained unchanged from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office up until very recently when the virus began to spread.
Initially the FCO advised travellers to remain where they were and to listen to the local authorities in the area.
However, with emergency rescue flights now negotiated by the UK government this week, hundreds of thousands of British citizens will be repatriated.
"It is extraordinarily unpleasant, unfriendly, and very worrying here." Mike told Manx Radio, "to stay here would be madness. We have to get out."
Though with the Island's borders set to remain shut until mid April, the return journey presents the pair with another problem.
"It means we land in the UK, we are homeless and the Isle of Man has abandoned us, simple as that."
The Isle of Man government is asking those stranded to contact the FCO for assistance
2nd April
Manx Radio
'It's not OK for government to leave people abroad without help' says MHK Clare Barber
105 Clare Barber stresses financial and logistical assistance is now critical
A Douglas MHK is seeking clarity on whether the Island's border closure is in violation of human rights.
Clare Barber believes the decision to block Manx residents from returning home should be challenged and admits there is a question around whether it breaches international law.
As part of its response to stem the spread of coronavirus, the Manx government banned the arrival of all inbound passengers last week.
Though many countries have adopted similar restrictions, with some enforcing the isolation of returning residents at designated facilities, the Isle of Man remains the only nation to refuse re-entry to its own citizens.
Howard Quayle told Tynwald this week the 'horrendously tough decision' was made to ensure the health service and those on-Island were not put at risk.
He also added the Island lacked the adequate infrastructure to quarantine its stranded residents, should they be repatriated.
Mrs Barber, who was unable to attend Tuesday's emergency sitting of Tynwald due to self-isolation rules, says it was a debate she listened to 'with great sadness'.
In a letter addressed to Chief Minister Howard Quayle following the media briefing she said the 105 Manx residents locked out of the Island were 'our most vulnerable right now' and she asked him to 'urgently consider' a repatriation plan.
She insists she doesn't dispute the decision to close the Island's borders, her issue is the reported lack of management of those who have been locked out.
"The first key point for me is arranging the financial and logistical support. It's absolutely critical" she told Manx Radio.
Advice from the Cabinet Office to the those stranded abroad remains to contact the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Manx Radio contacted the FCO asking whether it had a coordinated plan to either accommodate the returning Manx residents whilst in the UK, or to continue them on to the Isle of Man.
Its spokesperson replied 'you'll need to contact the Isle of Man government.'
2nd April
Letter from Department of Social Care to Health Minister David Ashford
(Sent to Mike Dean by Chris Robertshaw, see above in passage about communication with MHKs)
106 We have been asked to confirm the views of the clinicians and public health body within the DHSC . As Department meetings are now suspended their statement is enclosed.
Clearly the decisions made a through the political process via national strategy group and council of ministers and as officers we will continue to make recommendations to them accordingly.
Within this we will continue to emphasise the importance that the measures implemented will take a number of weeks to take effect and in particular the lack of controls. This is our only opportunity to suppress the curve and protect our healthcare services to cope with the predicted demand.
Repatriation
We have also been asked for our opinion on the repatriation of Manx residents and have now discussed as an executive team. Our recommendation would be now to support this approach now that there is a significant reduction from 2,000* to c130. We would only be able to manage the implications of these numbers in a carefully planned approach follow stringent health protocols but most importantly in order the safety of all residents. This we believe would take some time to mobilise and would need to include these numbers could be supported in strict quarantine sites. This is clearly a decision for the elected members. But it would our advice at this early stage.
Yours sincerely,
Kathryn Megson, Interim Chief Executive, DHSC
* It is not stated or is it clear how the figure of 2,000 was arrived at or who made the estimate. One conjecture is that it is the number of residents who had booked future passages on the Steam Packet and by air.
3rd April
Manx Radio
Quayle says repatriation scheme being worked on - more details on Monday
The government is working on a plan to repratriate Island residents back to the Isle of Man during the coronavirus pandemic.
Chief Minister Howard Quayle made the announcement during this morning's extraordinary sitting of Tynwald, which is being conducted remotely.
He told the court any such scheme had to balance the needs of those trapped abroad with the safety of those on the IoM.
3rd April
IoM Today
107 We have a plan to let people come home - Chief Minister
Chief Minister Howard Quayle has said the government ’has a plan’ to allow residents to return to their island, but he won’t reveal it just yet.
The decision to block residents from returning to the island was criticised by those stuck in the UK and politicians. However, Mr Quayle said the Council of Minister was following advice from clinicians.
With residents and politicians demanding answers, the Chief Minister today told Tynwald that he will make an announcement on Monday about how residents will be able to return as there are still some details to finalise.
It appears likely that they will be required to travel to Heysham and return to the island by boat.
Mr Quayle said: ’I am pleased to report that excellent progress has been made to unpick this Gordian Knot.
’We have a plan, we are close to finalising the rigorous protocols that may allow the return of our residents in a managed, safe, staggered manner.
’We will be working to finalise the details over the weekend and importantly, ensuring that our clinicians are 100% content. We will make a full announcement.’
However, despite the government climbing down on allowing residents back to the island, some still have to reach the UK. This responsibility lies with the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Mr Quayle said that those seeking to return to the island, will not be able to just turn up at Heysham to book onto a boat, they will have to be invited.
He has previously said that the decision to close off the island to residents in the UK was done to protect those who are already here. At the start of his Tynwald speech, he said that thosewishing to return were ’the biggest threat’ to people in the island.
The move was denounced earlier this week by MHKs including Bill Shimmins who told Tuesday’s Tynwald sitting ’it is far from heroic to abandon our own people’.
Others such as Clare Barber (Douglas East) queried the legality of the decision and raised concerns about what would happen to any residents off island if they were to become ill.
3rd April
BBC - Repatriation to take place in staggered way says Chief Minister. Plus interview with Alan Bell
Islanders will be repatriated in limited numbers each day, the chief minister said.
Isle of Man residents stranded overseas will be allowed to return home in a "safe and staggered manner", Chief Minister Howard Quayle has promised.
108 The Manx border was closed to almost all arrivals last week in a bid to limit the spread of coronavirus.
While many Manx residents made it home, the government believes 38 people are stuck in the UK and 131 elsewhere.
Mr Quayle said a plan would be ready by Monday to assist them, but warned not everybody could be helped immediately.
"We will make our decisions on evidence and the best clinical advice," he added.
Anyone outside the UK must rely on the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office to aid their return, Mr Quayle continued.
Stranded in India
One of those stranded overseas is 67-year-old Alan Bell, who is currently in the Indian state of Goa.
Mr Bell has been in India since 6 January, five days before China confirmed the worlds first known coronavirus death.
"We followed advice to the letter from the moment this started," said Mr Bell.
Alan Bell is living under lockdown measures in Goa
Initial guidance from the UK government told British travellers they did not need to return to the UK.
That changed on 23 March, however.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi ordered a nationwide lockdown the following day, leaving Mr Bell stuck with his friend Mike Dean.
Because they have no cooking facilities, the pair are relying on a nearby restaurant "to get a meal a day", Mr Bell said.
Even if they reached the UK, they would not be able to enter the Isle of Man until restrictions are lifted or they are invited to do so.
Mr Bell said he had sought guidance from the chief minister and "his and Mr Dean's emails have been acknowledged but we've received nothing".
He said not being able to get home was his "biggest wish".
6th April
IoM government press release
Government outlines repatriation process for IoM residents
Repatriation process outlined for Isle of Man residents.
109 Health Minister David Ashford MHK today outlined plans to allow the safe return of Isle of Man residents who did not make it back before the Island’s borders were closed on Friday 27 March.
Those returning will be placed in quarantine for 14 days at a specially-repurposed hotel on the Island.
During those 14 days, people will be required to follow strict self-isolation procedures but will be able to use a dedicated exercise area, under supervision. No visitors will be allowed.
Only those showing no symptoms of COVID-19 will be allowed to return and health checks will take place at the port.
Isle of Man Steam Packet ferries will be used to transport residents, who will be kept separate from others and required to self-isolate.
The first sailing will be on Wednesday 15 April, leaving Heysham at 2.15pm.
After reaching Douglas, passengers will be escorted to the quarantine facility.
There will be an application process for those wishing to return, who will be allocated one of the weekly sailings. Further information regarding the application process will be released over the next week.
Manx residents who are currently off-Island and have already contacted the Isle of Man Government will be told how to apply. Those who have not been in touch must make contact to start the process, and should email [email protected] as soon as possible.
Minister Ashford said:
‘We have been working on establishing the protocols of how we could return our residents in a safe and managed way since the borders were closed.
‘The Chief Minister has always been clear that it had to be at the right time and done in the right way to ensure the Isle of Man is not put at greater risk.
‘The plans that we have established have been informed by the very best clinical advice that we have received.’
All costs must be met by those returning, including those incurred at the quarantine facility. Those on certain benefits may be exempt.
6th April
BBC - Repatriation plans outlined for Manx residents revealed
Plans to repatriate about 200 Manx residents stranded by the coronavirus pandemic have been revealed by the health minister.
Limited numbers of people will be able to travel on "designated" ferry sailings from the UK starting on 15 April, David Ashford said.
110 Up to 190 residents were off island when the Isle of Man closed its borders to all new arrivals on 27 March.
Only those showing no symptoms of the virus will be permitted to return.
Everyone arriving back on the island will be quarantined in secure accommodation for 14 days before being allowed home, said Mr Ashford.
The process of repatriating all those affected would take "five to eight weeks", he added.
Last week, the Manx parliament heard that residents who were abroad when the island shut its borders felt "frightened and abandoned".
People currently overseas have been told to make their own way back to the UK on commercial flights or those organised for British citizens by the Foreign Office.
"We have been working since the border closure with our clinicians to develop a process where we can manage the return of our residents to our island clinically safely.
"This approach is tough but it protects our community and will preserve life, while doing the right thing by those that may, through no fault of their own, have been caught abroad."
The process would be "under continuous review" and would stop if there was "any indication that this is impacting our ability to manage the virus on the Isle of Man", he added.
A total of 139 people have tested positive for the virus, with six patients receiving treatment at Noble's Hospital.
Fifty-five are now classed as "presumed recovered" leaving 85 active current cases.
One person on the island has died as a result of the coronavirus.
11th April
IoM Government COVID 19 Website
Repatriation information and repatriation form
Plans are in progress to allow the safe return of Isle of Man residents who did not make it back before the Island’s borders were closed on Friday 27 March.
Those returning will be placed in quarantine for 14 days at a specially-repurposed hotel on the Island.
During those 14 days, people will follow strict self-isolation procedures and will be required to stay in their rooms with the exception of a single period of supervised exercise each day. No visitors will be
111 allowed; however you will be allowed to arrange for a named relative or friend to drop off one parcel of essential items once you have arrived at the hotel.
Only those showing no symptoms of COVID-19 will be allowed to return and health checks will take place at the port.
Isle of Man Steam Packet ferries will be used to transport residents, who will be kept separate from others. The first sailing took place from Heysham on Wednesday 15 April. After reaching Douglas, passengers will be escorted to quarantine for 14 days.
An information pack for returning residents is available for download.
------
Isle of Man Repatriation Online Form
In order to be considered for an exemption to travel under the Emergency Powers (Coronavirus) (Entry Restrictions) (Amendment No.2) Regulations 2020 we ask you to provide us with some information about yourself. This is being collected:
To assess whether you can be repatriated
Find out if you have any additional requirements we need to consider
You must complete this form in full (one per person). Please complete for yourself if aged 18 and over. Parent or guardian to complete on behalf of any child under the age of 18.
Under the Data Protection Legislation 2018 we will hold the personal information provided for the purpose it is supplied. Further details can be found in our GDPR Notice; that provides more information about the way in which we may use, share and store your personal information.
Completion of this form does not guarantee you a place on a sailing and applications will be prioritised for those individuals who are already in the UK and able to travel.
Before you start to complete this form you should make sure you have the following:
Proof of residence [Photographic proof attached to the form] . For example this can be a copy of your driving licence, proof of employment, National Insurance number, Tax reference, Passport (issued in IOM) should be listed as a type of residency evidence (if Manx), and Bus Pass (issued in IOM)
Where a red * is against a question, this is mandatory and must be completed before proceeding. This form is unable to be saved so please complete this form in one sitting.
Please only complete and submit this form when you are ready to travel. You will be allocated to a sailing and should you decide not to take up this place, you will be allocated a place on the next available sailing, after all other applicants have been allocated to sailings.
112 ------
11th April
IoM Government repatriation statement
Comis Hotel named as quarantine base
Today the Isle of Man Government will further progress the process of returning Isle of Man residents to the Island in a careful and controlled manner.
Since the closure of the Island’s borders on the 27th March over 400 individuals have been in touch from the UK and further afield. Those individuals who have been in contact will soon receive an email setting out the process and details on what they need to do next.
This has taken some time and there has been much to consider. This will not be a short process and only small groups of people will be allowed to return on a phased basis. So although the process opens today, the Island will only be able to take a small group to start with of around 30 who will be randomly selected. This is the only way to safely start this process.
No one should apply to return who is feeling unwell. A health check will take place before you travel and if you are not considered fit you will not be allowed to board the boat. You will be responsible for your own travel and accommodation in the UK and will also need to pay for your boat back and your accommodation in the Isle of Man.
The Comis Hotel is the first hotel that will be providing accommodation to those arriving and will be carefully managed with a 24 hour security presence.
An Isle of Man repatriation form is now available online for people applying to return to the IoM.
11th April
IoM Today
Comis Hotel to accommodate returning residents
Comis Hotel will be the first hotel in the island to accommodate returning residents.
The Isle of Man Government announced that the Mount Murray hotel will accommodate the first 30 residents to return from the other side of the border where they will be ’carefully managed’ with 24 hour security.
113 Since the closure of the Island’s borders on the March 27, over 400 individuals have been in touch from the UK and further afield.
Those who have been in contact will soon receive an email setting out the process and details on what they need to do next.
As spokesman said: ’This has taken some time and there has been much to consider. This will not be a short process and only small groups of people will be allowed to return on a phased basis.
’So although the process opens today, the island will only be able to take a small group to start with of around 30 who will be randomly selected. This is the only way to safely start this process.’
The government warned that no one should apply to be repatriated if they are feeling unwell.
A health check will take place before individuals travel. If they are not considered to be ’fit’ they will not be allowed to board the boat.
Returning residents will be responsible for their own travel and accommodation in the UK and will also need to pay for the boat back, plus accommodation in the Island.
13th April
Gef the Mongoose Website
Written by Gef
Repatriation: Two steps forward, three legs back
We are Manx citizens currently stranded abroad, in the future abroad, entirety different time zone abroad.
So far abroad that, despite our best efforts, we have been unable to return. We left the island back in November with two years worth of savings intended to fund 6 months of travel.
Currently in the South Pacific, we tried to return as soon as we heard about a potential lockdown. We waited long days for 9am UK time to speak with the travel agent. It didn't look good; the situation was changing rapidly but we were reassured that a flight back to the UK would be found. I heard other hotel guests crying on the phone in the corridor.
One night, a flight had been found via Singapore and we transferred £1000 to cover the additional cost– prices had skyrocketed. Almost immediately I received an email from the foreign office. Singapore was closed to transit. We didn't go ahead with the flight booking and are still waiting for a refund of the money.
We moved into a cheaper hostel, began to connect with other tourists in the same situation and the days began to blur. Those around us were paying thousands for flights that were then cancelled. Two
114 friends managed to make it home via the US, one girl was escorted off a plane that was just about to take off because her onward connection had been cancelled.
We completed forms to allow us to transit through any route that might become available. We contacted the IOM government and were told that no assistance was available, the UK foreign office continued to tell us to return to the UK but there were no transit routes open. The number of COVID-19 cases in the area rose and the main airport closed – many of their staff confined to lockdown. Group's began to splinter off and Airbnbs were found, we took an apartment for a week so that we could cook our own food to save money but leaving the tourist area was daunting and it took us several days to get used to the area we were in. The apartment had caging on all the windows and doors and security lights that had to be kept on overnight, the gate was locked with a large chain and padlock and the local dogs barked all night.
There was an overnight curfew in place and social distancing advised but it was not being followed. The Isle of Man then closed its borders and several Manx locals proclaimed on social media that we shouldn't be allowed back home. There were rumours of a flight via the US once the lockdown was lifted. We weren't hopeful and signed a one month lease on an apartment in order to save ourselves more money.
IOM government released a statement to say that they would be helping stranded residents to return – fantastic!
Then an email from the embassy, there was a flight available the next day – we had just moved into the apartment and paid a months rent! At first the flights were released to the website in the wrong currency, £2000 each! Well we can't afford that we'll have to stay here. Then the price was amended £1000 each! Okay, and we can get a connecting flight for around £500 but that's all of our savings, what do we do when we get there? The IOM still haven't advised what help we'll be getting. At least here we have food and accommodation for a month. We deliberated for nearly 2 hours, by which time the decision was made for us; the connecting flight had gone up to £3000 each-we couldn't afford to get it. That night the IOM gov released further details of the repatriation help… it could take up to 8 weeks. So we would have been stranded in the UK with no money. Many others took the flight, we received several emails from the local embassy pressuring us to take a loan and get the flight but we would have nowhere to go on arrival so we declined. By ‘Good’ Friday things were largely back to what had become the normal blur of days, we didn't even realise it was Easter. We'd had no further information from the IOM gov and the local British embassy had advised that further flights would probably be after the new lockdown was lifted on the 17th April.
Then another last minute email from the embassy; the French were running a repatriation flight and it was open to British citizens. Another scramble for information–approx £1500 each–we could just about afford it. However, with no further information from the IOM and the prospect of an 8 week wait in the UK we would quickly be bankrupt and stranded in the UK. We again took the difficult decision to turn it down, we have food and accommodation and there will hopefully be more flights after lockdown ends on the 17th. We may as well make use of the accommodation we have rather than spend all our money
115 traveling to uncertainty in the UK. So we waited for the IOM gov and their promised assistance for those stranded…
Apparently there are now 400 people on the government list of stranded Manx citizens, all of whom will be in similar, if not far worse, situations. Most of whom will have spent, or have to spend, thousands of pounds to get back to the UK. Many of whom have empty homes that are perfectly suitable for isolation purposes. Some, like ourselves, who already have valid steam packet bookings that could be transferred.
These 400 people all received the same email:
‘You will have to pay up to £1000 each to be repatriated. You cannot go back to your homes, you cannot be trusted to isolate-despite most of us coming from countries where we have already been isolated and have seen first hands the benefits. Personally, I have no desire to put my family and friends at risk, especially if I've been stuck in the UK (potentially ones of the most dangerous virus zones right now) for up to 8 weeks. Essentially, the email said, you will be imprisoned for 14 days, and you must pay for it. The government are using us to bail out the steam packet, the hotel and the security firm–who would otherwise have no income. No, I didn’t expect the government to foot the bill, I expected the government to behave rationally, to provide assistance to its citizens abroad, and to let us go home where we, unlike a small number of residents, can be trusted to stay. If arrests have been made then where are the fines? Why can't those flouting the rules be imprisoned and made to pay to isolate? Why are we being punished for something that we weren't even on the island for!
Instead we wait. It's taken the IOM gov 5 days to sort out the paperwork. How long before we receive any real answers? Should we spend all of our savings on the next flight? If we don't, how long will we be stuck here? How long will we be waiting in the UK? My medication is getting low and my mental health is suffering. When will I have access to healthcare? Whilst I appreciate the government’s efforts, this proposed solution is frankly useless to us. It’s just more money to find that will put us further into debt at a time when we may have no future income.
And still, members of the local community point the finger, tell us to stay where we are, that we are putting them at risk, that we shouldn't be allowed back, that it's all our own fault. I try not to take it personally but its demoralising to say the least. I am exhausted. The nuggets of hope that are dangled only to be snatched away, the constant heat, the fear, the uncertainty; it is all taking its toll.
Fortunately, we have friends and family who continue to be amazingly supportive and to them, and those who understand and are sympathetic to our situation, we are endlessly grateful. To those others, I’d say please think before you post your comments, you don't know what people's situations are, what damage your thoughtless comments could do to those who are suffering, try to be kind to each other.
Comment: [Name redacted]
I love you story can you copy it to manx covid 19 repatriation site on FB please?
Comment: [Name redacted]
116 We are in New Zealand, managed to get a flight arriving UK in a few days. Got told by IoM Gov a few hours ago that our application to return was unsuccessful because we are not in UK!?!? No idea yet which boat we may be allowed on. So arranging affordable accommodation will be a challenge. All the best to all returning residents!
Comment: [Name redacted]
Heartfelt thanks to know I not the only one to feel abandoned by a government who seem to be going out of their way with daily press conferences to scare monger the Manx public into thinking we are the enemy .. do any of them know where the people on island who have tested positive live and if they are staying indoors ? Have they all got 24 hour security in lockdown ?
14th April - Manx Radio
Tynwald debates repatriation regulations - fairness questioned by some
A number of MHKs have questioned the fairness of the Manx government’s planor returning residents.
At a virtual sitting of Tynwald today (14 April), members picked over regulations to do with the repatriation process, whereby 30 randomly selected Manx people stuck abroad will be held in mandatory quarantine at the Comis Hotel for 14 days.
Thirty of the estimated 400 stranded residents will return tomorrow (15 April) and are being asked to pay the costs of their accommodation, travel and meals.
Health Minister David Ashford says these costs are capped at £1,000, but Ramsey MHK Lawrie Hooper described asking people to pay for mandatory quarantine as ‘abhorrent’.
It’s understood those who can’t afford to pay up-front will be asked to do so over a longer period.
Mr Hooper tabled an amendment to take out the clause whereby residents were excluded from the repatriation process if they have been staying in a property they own, or one of a close family member.
Middle MHK Bill Shimmins echoed those sentiments.
According to Mr Ashford, the ‘tough decisions’ taken on repatriation are guided by clinical advice – he highlighted the risks a breach in quarantine could pose in tackling the Covid-19 pandemic.
Garff MHK Daphne Caine called out what she saw as a ‘lack of compassion’ from government towards those who’ve been ‘stranded through no fault of their own’.
Mr Hooper’s amendment was voted through unanimously and the order approved.
117 16th AprIl
Repatriation journey described a "unpleasant" by returning resident
Manx Radio
Mike Dean among first 29 repatriates
The process for transporting returning Manx residents from the Sea Terminal to the Comis Hotel, has been described as unpleasant and unwelcoming by one of the first repatriates.
Twenty-nine people were the first to be returned to the Island yesterday, out of a total of 400 awaiting their return home.
Mike Dean was among the group and says the measures in place once they arrived on the Isle of Man, felt unnecessary.
16th April
Gef the Mongoose Website
Written by Aaron Ibanez
Repatriation: An Unpopular Story
The pages of the humble Manx history book have never seen such times.
And once this particular chapter that is our present day is finally read, words such as ‘exceptional’ and ‘unprecedented’ may well have lost all meaning.
Whomever the author, they will tell of an age where ‘social distancing’ and ‘self isolation’ weren’t concepts plucked from a lost novel of George Orwell, but were in fact a way of life and a new normal for an Island gripped, like all nations, by a pandemic.
Some may write of a police state and its flouters of the law, others may write of community spirit, when the public stood in solidarity with its frontline workers and applauded in the doorways of their houses every Thursday night.
Others may simply say that there was no wealth to be had in money, and family was the only currency needed to buy your way out.
But all of course, will honour the dead taken by a foe we so desperately wanted to escape.
118 A date that made Covid-19 our very stark reality and not just a name uttered by a faraway newsreader, was the 27th March 2020.
‘Our primary objective has been and will continue to be, the preservation of life’ announced Chief Minister Howard Quayle, before declaring the full closure of the Island’s borders to all inbound passengers.
Never before had a Chief Minister taken such a step, to lock out what would soon become over 400 of his own citizens.
Fast forward three weeks, on to Wednesday 15th April 2020, to an Island in the thick of a lockdown where the virus tragically claimed the lives of four of its own and where the cases topped 250.
A community still in mourning but given a reason to rejoice, as 29 of those stranded, some parents, some sons and daughters, some next door neighbours arrived safely by a boat, aptly named Mannanan.
It was a date that marked the beginning of what would be the largest repatriation of its kind for the Isle of Man.
However leading up to this point proved divisive, unpopular and not without its controversy.
The lock out was a decision made for the greater good, with Islander’s told it would protect the NHS and therefore ultimately, the most vulnerable in the community.
An indisputable sentiment, though did the move have to come at the expense of those left abroad?
“We are living in a national emergency” decried Mr Quayle to Tynwald “not some little joy ride where we have made some minor decision to do this on a whim.
“This has been a horrendously tough decision to make, but it is made at the advice of our medics, who we must respect.”
The Chief Minister was attacked for a possible breach of human rights, being seen as denying Manx residents ‘the right to return’, a principle of international law.
For those abroad, some felt stateless and abandoned as correspondence from the Cabinet Office told them bluntly ‘the Isle of Man Government is not offering any assistance at this time.’
Mr Quayle, incensed at those who questioned the move, asked his critics then if they wanted to be the ones responsible for the bodies piling up because they ignored the medical advice.
Avid viewers of the daily media briefings found the Chief Minister increasingly endearing, though perhaps he didn’t anticipate the effect his inflammatory rhetoric would have for an Island said to be putting into practice a mantra of kindness, an Island which was clapping for its carers, an Island united against an invisible enemy.
119 Quickly, radio call ins and the online community became rife with vitriol that mocked and scorned those stuck abroad, a group of people one MHK described as the Island’s ‘most vulnerable who were in their greatest hour of need.’
Their story was unpopular.
So much so that when approached by the media to speak of their experience being stranded, they declined through fear of further hurt and derision.
While those who did speak, said they were either staying put to wait it out, or were coming home regardless of a lack of sympathy.
For those on Island, they were of course scared and with the government’s message of protectionism, attitudes began to show little in the way of kindness.
While the threat of coronavirus was recognised as a humanitarian crisis the world over, the response to the plight of Manx people caught up in foreign lands was reminiscent of a debate around a resettlement programme not long ago.
When pressed for an apology over the language that ensued and perhaps given a chance to rally support around those facing an unknown future away from home, the Health Minister David Ashford branded both sides as the name-callers.
He himself later went on to reveal the prospective repatriates would be responsible for an Italy-style trajectory on the Island, if left ‘unmanaged.’
Although 2000 or so were able to get back within the 48 hour window as advised, those locked out weren’t factored into Public Health modelling, should they be reintroduced to the community.
What became clear then, was the inconvenience these few hundred residents posed to the Manx government.
Under pressure though to find a solution, the Council of Ministers seemingly consulted with its medics about a possible repatriation plan, five days after the border closure. This was while maintaining the claim it had a strategy for return since day one.
Shortly after plans were afoot to bring them home on the ferry, it came caveated with a warning from Mr Ashford, who reiterated they would be responsible for an additional 100 cases on top of what was expected.
The Island's trajectory as mapped by the Department of Health and Social Care was fixed, veering from that path he said, risked a compromise or 'a double-bounce effect'.
Here for the first time, the government in its war-like footing against the elusive coronavirus, a battle of so many unknowns fought at political light-speed, was finally armed with some foresight.
120 It meant the Minister could say with near-certainty that the repatriates would cripple the Island’s health service, should their return lack medical control.
The first phase of returning residents was of course medically vetted prior to boarding at Heysham port.
Those deemed unwell and indeed symptomatic, were denied travel to the Island and were expected to find accommodation in the UK unassisted.
For those then assumed Covid-negative, they were subject to 14 days of quarantine at the four-star COMIS Golf Resort and Hotel under the watch of 24 hour security.
Meanwhile in the community, those Covid-positive with mild symptoms continued to be trusted to self- isolate at home, without monitoring.
Compassion was at the heart of the repatriation plan according to the government, who ordered those wishing to come to pay a maximum of £1000 to cover their travel and accommodation costs.
While snacks, laundry and toiletries were to come at an extra expense.
A petition has since been launched by a band of Manx people left locked out in the UK and further afield, and to them, the conditions of repatriation are a disproportionate and expensive prison sentence.
Meanwhile, it was said those caught in breach of the Island’s lock down laws would face a £10,000 fine, however at the time of writing, no financial penalties have been issued.
Though, one man with symptoms of the virus who ignored mandatory isolation, was sent to prison for 6 weeks.
“I think people need to be realistic.” said Dr Alex Allinson at the most recent media briefing.
“We need to bring these people home, but we need to do it in a safe way both for them and the rest of the population.”
He explained quarantine was the right to place to put the newly returned residents as ‘we don’t know their risk. We don’t know how much of the virus they’re carrying with them.’
The repatriation policy will be kept under review despite being what he describes as both ‘compassionate and humane’.
But for the 29 Manx men and women who’ve now checked in to quarantine, after managing patiently in a Liverpool AirBnB, who’ve escaped one lock down to be caught in another, who were put up in tents under the care of Countess Monbatten’s Own Legion of Frontiersmen, this page of history will remember your endeavours that eventually got you to the safest place you knew.
Online comment:
121 Good assessment of the situation, as far as I am aware not one of the returnees has disputed the lock down or the need for quarantine, only the manner in which it was handled, the poor communication and the inflammatory language used at times, which has led to some extremely nasty comments from people about the situation.
23 April
Manx Independent
Quote from Chief Minister Howard Quayle after returning from self-isolation
Mr Quayle said that the IoM had done phenomenally well in controlling the spread of the virus, with the transmission rate falling from 19% to under 7%.
The Island was the first in the world to bring in 14-day quarantine before even seeing its first case of COVID 19 and iz ninth in the world when it comes to the amount of testing that has been carried out.
23rd April
Manx Independent
A diary of confinement and quarantine in Comis Hotel (Precis)
[Name redacted] were in the first repatriated Manx residents in the Comis Hotel. He compiled a diary of his first week.
We boarded the ferry in a confined, isolated manner. We have no issues with the way this was carried out. The coach drivers were marvellous.
On arrival we were confronted by police officers and shown a copy of what was expected of us and asked to sign a "do or don't" document and told to reboard the coach.
After the pice escort to the hotel we arrived at the Comis to find armed police officers and Avery smug arms folded price superintendent which reminded me of the commandant in the film The Great Escape.
Day two
The returnees have set up a closed Facebook page to keep in contact with each other while we are interned.
There is an air of frustration and anger amongst the inmates due to the armchair warriors spitting there vitriol and poisonous remarks on social media. It also spills into Manx Independent letters page but we are keeping ourselves bolstered with support for each other.
122 Day three
There are still the armchair warriors on line but we have now taken this as a way of life and beginning to ignore the myths being put out in the media. To be honest this difficult situation is being fuelled by the spin being put on our plight by ministerial press conferences about all the repatriated residents having the virus.
This is being cut and pasted by civil servants and handed to ministers to spout without any real thought for compassion.
Day six
Eureka, the poses that be will now allow us to have newspapers! At our expense of course, but at least it is a step in the right direction and being treated as human beings rather than human guinea pigs!
I think the powers that be are beginning that we do not pose the threat that "The Model" suggest.
Day seven
Well, half way through the internment today and none of the 29 has a whiff of the virus.
This must be an embarrassment to ministers who assumed by now at least one or two of us would be falling over.
23rd April
Manx Independent
Residents trapped and let down by Government
When the Island's borders slammed shut just under a month ago, it left some residents stuck in the UK and around the world.
Then on April 6 the government announced that it will allow people to return in batches of 30, on condition they are quarantined at Comis Hotel for 14 days of a cost of up to £1,000.
The decision to charge people "for there own incarceration" as Ramsey MHK Lawrie Hooper put it, has been met with a mixed response by Manx residents.
But some of those who remain stuck outside the border have been surprised at the criticism levelled at them on social media and radio phone in shows.
Those we have spoken to since the border closed have asked to remain anonymous either due to their jobs or through fear they and their families will be targeted online.
123 One resident told us how travelling to attend the funeral of her father and comfort her grieving mother, her partner was left stuck off-island.
Completely Untrue and Unfair
She said: "There is perceptive that all returnees are all people with second homes or on their jollies and decided not to try and get home even there was plenty of notice - this is completely unfair and untrue.
"And the idea that those returning are all disease ridden and carry a greater infection risk is also untrue and unfair assumption. Most of these people will have been subjected to "lockdown" where they are - many with greater restrictions than on the Island.
"There are also claims that returnees want to be repatriated for free. This is also unfair and untrue. There may be some who need financial assistance due to the unexpected and onerous costs they needed to pay to cover cancelled flights etc.".
Angry at Having to Pay Quarantine Costs
She said no one had objective to paying the return travel costs, but they were angry at being expected to pay to be quarantined at the Comis Hotel, where threatening billed £2.50 per soft drink.
Treated like Criminals
Having arrived bag in the IoM on the first repatriation sailing, her partner described being offloaded off the ferry in a coach and driving under police escort to the Comis Hotel as being treated "like dangerous criminals".
Another resident, who is stuck on the other side of the world, was told he cannot apply for permission to return to the until they are in the UK. Until this point, Manx residents are the responsibility of the UK's FCO.
When he contacted his travel insurer, he was told to stay where he was as travel back to the IoM could not be guaranteed and he would be effectively made homeless at Heathrow airport.
He told the Manx Independent he felt "truly let down" by the Manx government.
He added: "I pay my Income Tax, my rates etc. But I am expected to pay £1,000 to be incarcerated in a small room for £3 hours a day patrolled by security guards, CCTV and alarmed doors, only if I show no symptoms.
"But residents currently on IoM hat test positive can self-isolate at home with their own families."
Other residents have questioned why they should travel across most of England to be able to travel, thereby further risking catching the virus when there was a flight to the IoM from London.
Government: Returnees Pose the Greatest Risk
124 The government has defended its position on the returning residents throughout the border closure saying they pose "the greatest risk" to the Island.
125 126 Appendix 8: 26th to 30th April 2020 – Emails from a resident to Daphne Caine MHK and Clare Barber MHK
127 128 From: [Contact details readacted] Sent: 30 April 2020 13:55 To: Caine, Daphne (MHK) Cc: Barber, Clare (MHK) Subject: Re: IOM Repatriation
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Good afternoon Daphne and Clare
I am now at the Comis. Not feeling too bright. Is there anyway you could help me please. I am trying to work remotely and the internet is appaling. Its taken me 4 hours to do what would usually take me 1 hour. I have seen that other returnees are just being charged £875 yet ive paid £100 deposit and still have to pay £875. The payment plan is not over 12 months its 9. I really am very worried about this as i wanted to pay it over 2 years so that i can still keep a roof over my head. There is also a 2% interest charge. I also do not eat lunch, therefore i would expect a reduction of my total cost. Could you possibly advise on this please.
Thank you
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020, 15:23 [Name readacted] wrote: Hi Daphne
Thank you so much for your reply and fighting the powers that be. Lifted my spirits.
Just wish they would stop this lock up. So unfair.
Many thanks
Take care
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020, 14:23 Caine, Daphne (MHK), wrote: Dear [Name readacted] It seems completely unacceptable to me, as does the whole repatriation process. We , Members, had a briefing from DoI earlier and have asked the department to confirm what right they have to conduct such searches. We have also pressed for a review of the outside time limit. I trust they will reconsider the policy implementation guidance immediately and hope for changes and more compassionate application of the rules in the coming days.
Best wishes
Daphne
129
Get Outlook for iOS
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 9:30 PM +0100, [Name readacted] wrote:
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Hi Daphne
I have just sent the following email to Clare Barber
Sorry its late, but i just wanted to let you know that people at the Comis have had bags that have been dropped off searched and items taken out such as a bottles of cordial, oranges and gluten free snacks. These bags also containrd personal items. Is this acceptable as people are now being pushed passed their limits.
Best regards [Name readacted]
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020, 13:05 [Name readacted] wrote: Dear Daphne
Thank you for your kind offer to help me/us. Heres my,what can only be described as frustrating and traumatic story so far. This email has also been sent to [Names redacted]
My name is [Name readacted] . I am [Age redacted] and i have a job as an [Readacted] . I came over to Liverpool on 21 March 2020 for 4 weeks to look after my mum as she had [treatment and hospital redacted] I am the only one who could give her the care she needs. I have been caught up in the border closures. It has been a nightmare here trying to organise shopping, I have phoned around my mum’s local shops and asked for help. Such kind people, the butcher will deliver to mums and the co-op take my orders over the phone and these are picked up and dropped off to us. 1 neighbour has offered help too. I came here with winter clothing and have had to cut up trousers into shorts and been given tshirts from a neighbour as its been so hot. I’m just hoping I have thought of everything to help my mum before my return.
I am one of the admin on a facebook page [Name redacted] We have lots of members, all confused and very upset.
I am extremely anxious about staying at the Comis and being locked up for 23 hours a day for 14 days. I do understand there is one rule for everyone but i have been isolating since i got here and am not a risk. I know it is my choice to return and like everyone else i want to get back to my family who I miss terribly. I do not agree with being locked up nor paying for the hotel. People are being tested positive on the island and sent home to isolate, prisoners are being released and now the construction industry, gardeners etc have been sent back to work. Have these workers be tested over 14 days before they go back to work. This makes me feel like i am being discriminated against. I am being treated like a caged animal and this is causing me tremendous stress and anxiety problems. I am also aware that a member of staff
130 at the Comis tested positive. Another worry I have is my bad smoking habit. When I contacted Mr Cregeen concerning this his answer was: no you cant smoke and it will make you give them up. How dare he, this is my choice.
I contacted the Repatriation Team and was given an incorrect email address to apply to return. Then I applied again using the new email address, to be followed by yet another form to complete. At this point I was informed I couldn’t return as I had left the island after the 27th March, my ticket said 21st March, I wasn’t in the UK yet I am in Liverpool which is in the UK and I was living at my mums house that she owned. I was devastated. This, as we know, was changed. I didn’t have to re fill the form in. As it stands I am now on the 29th April boat back to the IOM.
I enquired about my one box of necessities and also my work monitor, keyboard and mouse so that I could attach this to my laptop as I am working remotely and cannot do this without these items. I was advised that the monitor etc would have to be put into the box. There is no way my company would agree to that. Due to this my family have posted over the essential items I need and my partner will be picking up my monitor etc to drop off at the Comis. I emphasised to the Repatriation team that I didn’t have the equipment to enable me to work remotely then I wouldn’t get paid, have to claim benefits then my stay at the Comis would be free.
All the workers who will be “dealing” with me i.e boat and Comis have not been tested, therefore is this not a great risk to myself. In the words of Jason Moorhouse over the telephone they are no different to Tesco staff. I have to make my own way to Heysham, again risking catching the virus. My understanding was that I was to be brought back on the Ben as it has cabins and myself and others would not be in contact with each other. More changes, more stress.
Where is this so called clinical evidence? The IOM Government are barbaric and cruel. Why are we being treated so differently? We are hated by the IOM residents. David Ashford stated the majority of the island wants us to be quarantined. Was this okay for him to state this and where’s the actual figures for that.
Quote from David Ashford when I complained about the Comis costs: Thank you for this, the principle all along has been for a user pays model of repatriation and I know many people don’t support that but it is what has been legally agreed. It was felt that the tax payer should pick up the bill for people’s quarantine particularly where people may be in a position to pay and as in theory the other option is to leave the borders closed to all which would come at no cost.
I believe from good sources that patients are still being flown to and from the IOM to have treatment. Which is really good for them. On the other hand these patients are attending hospitals full of Covid-19, when they get back to the IOM they self isolate at home. Why is it so different for us.
Having a Police escort to the hotel is demoralising and embarrassing. The Govt are really going full on to make the returnees look like disease ridden people. This is just unacceptable.
131 Then to be told my hotel room has an alarm on is just adding to my anxiety. I am not good in small closed spaces. I have enquired about dietary needs as I am [dietary needs redacted] this I will have to discuss when I get to the Comis. Sometimes I don’t eat breakfast and sometimes I don’t eat lunch. Will this be deducted from my “fine”. I say fine because I feel like I am being treated as a prisoner.
I have written numerous emails to ministers, David Ashford doesn’t care, Howard Quayle doesn’t even bother replying. Clare Barber and Lawrie Hooper have been very helpful and also do not agree with the Bullying Regulations on Repatriation.
All in all this has taken a really bad toll on my mental health. I have gone from a happy relaxed person to a quivering mess. I have spoken to my GP who has prescribed me [medication and condition redacted] . As the IOM don’t have the facility to electronically transfer prescriptions someone had to pick them up and next day post them to me. Last year I had [condition redacted]and im scared I will get it again through stress. I also have an [condition redacted] which causes me terrible headaches, probably exasperated by the stress i am going through.So much stress, anxiety, upset and worry along with having to pay costs I can ill afford. I will never again feel like the IOM is my home. A place I have always felt privileged to live in. I have been there for over 25 years, I have family who have been there for over 40 years. I work hard and pay my dues. To be treated in such an appalling way is disgusting.
Sorry if my email is a bit all over the place, im trying to do things for my mum in-between writing this. Good luck and I hope you have success with this.
Best regards
132 Appendix 9: 30th April 2020 – Email from Tanya August-Hanson MLC
133 134 Archived: 30 April 2020 14:55:01 From: [Tanya August-Hanson MLC] Sent: 30 April 2020 11:10:32 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Subject: RResidents: suggested PAC questions Importance: Normal
Dear Members of the PAC,
I’ve condensed my questioning on this because I feel that the PAC will have too little time to get answers, having requested only an hour of the CM’s time. Though we’re making a great start in scrutinising, I hope that it might be considered more time may be allocated to this in future.
Qu suggestions:
· Can you please provide a time-line and process for decision making on commencement of the returning residents project? Where did discussions begin re: the foundations of strategic direction, and how did plans progress as principles materialised into live policy? Who was involved?
· Was an options paper presented to clinicians with the intention that they model quarantine against the effect of 14-day self-isolation for returning residents, and the ballot system against risk assessments, alongside Public Health researchers and the EAD – predicting a preferred outcome to manage the curve? If so, can you explain the response, and if not, can you please explain WHY not?
· What difference – in your mind – is there between a new policeman and his family travelling to relocate to the Isle of Man, and a returning resident family who have no key worker between them? How do you choose which family should be quarantined? What are the indicators?
Ø Questioner: FYI only: Minister Ashford was questioned on this – here is his response: ‘The public health position is that it is not acceptable to separate a family in that way, and it could also be open to legal challenge. Therefore they have a strict 14 day isolation applied to them and of any symptoms appear that shuts down the whole household including the key worker. The key worker carries a legal responsibility for the behaviour of their family to ensure they comply which can result in a custodial sentence for any breach.’
· In what ways does each decision manifest now the main structure is finalised? How is that managed through the hierarchy of Ministers and CEOs to staff in CabO, DoI, G4S and DHSC?
Ø SUPP question: how are decisions on the treatment of residents during their stay at the Comis vetted by CoMin, NSG and Gold Command – is it scrutinised from within government to ensure fairness in balance, and if so, HOW?
Ø SUPP question: Do you personally receive regular report on how residents are treated at the Comis?
135 · There has been a significant back-step in search and temporary seizure of property belonging to returning residents at Comis by DoI staff. So, what has been the strongest, and weakest feature – in your opinion – of quarantine at the Comis? Nothing is ever perfect. Would you change anything?
Ø SUPP question: was there a legal challenge to searching personal possessions without permission on route into Comis? What legislation underpinned their right to search?
Questioner: FYI only: a lead officer on the project responded to me: ‘Unfortunately I understand that the issue of checking bags to enforce these terms and conditions was not set out in writing and therefore should not have taken place.’
· Why is no financial assistance given to residents stranded abroad that are not given leave to return? How was this decided?
· What about the financial cost at the Comis? Who took the decision that people should have to pay at all? What reasoning and evidence base underpinned decision-making?
· As it so clearly connects: What is the number of Certificates issued for Exemptions by the Chief Secretary to cover private sector business needs?
Ø SUPP question: what difference is there – in your mind – between a person travelling to London Heathrow for critical business needs, and a person with critical medical needs?
Ø SUPP question: why does that businessman/woman not need to be quarantined on returning to the Island? Are they ‘key workers’?
· How many people have travelled in and out of the Isle of Man Certified under the title of 'Company or Other Body' since the Border Closed?
· Finally, and again: was quarantine over a 14-day isolation for returning residents a political decision, or was it not?
There are many, many more questions that I would ask, but in an hour I predict you may not get through more than three subject areas relating to the topic.
I wish you good luck.
Lhiats / Warm regards, Tanya
TAH2
136 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AFTER REPORT (VOLUME 1) LAID BEFORE TYNWALD
137 138 Appendix 10: 7th May 2020 – Email from Chief Minister to Mr and Mrs Coué
139 140 From: On Behalf Of Chief Minister Sent: 07 May 2020 09:59 To: Charles Coue Cc: Ashford, David (MHK); Hooper, Lawrie (MHK); Barber, Clare (MHK); Allinson, Alex (MHK); Cannan, Alfred (MHK); Watterson, Juan (SHK) Subject: RE: Returning Residents Scheme - Concerns
Dear Mr and Mrs Coue,
Thank you for your letter of 1st May 2020. I am so sorry to hear that you had such a negative experience of returning home after what should have been a wonderful trip of a lifetime for you both to celebrate your retirement. A number of Island Residents were travelling internationally when we had to make the decision to close our borders and I appreciate that your circumstances of being stuck at sea for a prolonged period before getting to the UK and then to the Island would have been particularly difficult for you both.
The decision to close the borders on the 27th March was made very swiftly with the aim of minimising the impact of Coronavirus on the Island’s population and saving lives. It instantly put us into unchartered territory and Departments across the Public Service then had to work together swiftly to be able to facilitate the return of our residents from across the UK and beyond. An approach was developed at speed across the Department of Infrastructure, Cabinet Office and Department of Health and Social Care based on the best clinical advice. We knew any approach we implemented couldn’t be perfect as it had not been done before and that we would have to learn and develop the approach over time, evolving as the clinical advice did. However, we made the decision to implement our approach without delay out of a desire to safely repatriate our residents as soon as possible.
I can see from your letter that you were part of the first cohort that travelled to the Island. Whilst I hope that this was very timely for you with a very short stay in the UK, I can also appreciate that your experience reflects the learning curve that we have been on in terms of how the quarantine approach was implemented. You have my sincere apologies for that and please be reassured that none of this was intended to make you or any residents feel uncomfortable in any way.
Much has been learned in the few weeks since you returned to the Island and we have taken on board the feedback we have received from those of you who have experienced the repatriation and quarantine process. A number of changes have been implemented including but not limited to:
An additional approach to payment where people can pay a deposit and instalments over a period of time if their financial circumstances require this Contact with quarantining residents from DHSC shortly after their arrival at the hotel to provide support, with the option for this to continue throughout their stay, subject to their choice A more relaxed approach around access to home comforts, drinks, snacks etc. with no bags being searched The police escort of the coach that happened on your return during the first week is under review and did not happen this week
On the matter of bags being searched I understand that this was stopped immediately once the matter was raised and I also believe you have been offered an apology by G4S.
In answer to your specific question regarding whether tax relief will be available for the £1,750 cost of repatriation, I’m sorry but I’m afraid that is not an option. I do not believe it is fair to the taxpayer
141 to apply any blanket financial support when we are unable to make a determination on each individual’s circumstances or understand their individual insurance arrangements. I understand that it may feel like you have had to bear more cost than others if the approach changes to self-isolation in future. However, these residents will likely have had other costs to bear, for example longer term accommodation costs whilst awaiting return for a potentially longer period. There have been a wide variety of costs that residents have had to pay to return home to our Island from their worldwide travels and I do appreciate the financial hardship that this will unfortunately have caused some people.
I understand that my response and apologies cannot fully mitigate the impact of the difficult experience you have had but I hope that it at least helps. I also note that you have made a request in your letter that your views and experience helps to ensure a more positive experience for future returning residents. With a combination of the improvements we have been making for our residents currently staying in the Comis, and our aim to use our currently improving clinical situation to evolve our quarantine approach into self-isolation wherever possible, I can give you my commitment to do all I can to ensure that we do deliver on that request.
Yours sincerely
Howard
Hon Howard Quayle MHK Chief Minister Isle of Man Government Chief Minister’s Office Government Office Bucks Road Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PG
142 Appendix 11: 14th May 2020 – Emails between Mr Speaker and Dr Henrietta Ewart, Director of Public Health
143 144 From: Ewart, Henrietta Sent: 14 May 2020 18:19 To: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Cc: [Dr Rosaline Ranson] Subject: RE: Medical advice
Dear Mr Watterson, Thank you for your email. The policy on repatriation was, of course, a political decision. I was not asked for, and did not give, any direct Public Health advice to government on this. Medical advice was sought from the Senior Clinical and Public Health Advisory Group. The advice from this group was based on concern that even a small number of ‘imported cases’ could have ‘seeded’ community spread on island which could have had a significant effect on the epidemic curve here and on health service capacity. I think this assessment was appropriate at the time it was made. You will probably remember that the sharp ‘take off ‘ in numbers in the UK (and its dispersion across the country) can largely be related to individuals and families returning from ski-ing trips in Northern Italy around the February half-term period, and we were also witnessing the epidemic in Northern Italy and its impact in terms of overwhelming health service capacity and mortality.
I would not, therefore, have challenged the clinical risk assessment at the time that it was given. The issue now is whether levels of community transmission in the UK are now significantly higher than ours to present a significant ongoing risk of seeding new outbreaks on island if we relaxed the arrangements for repatriation, particularly given the strong ‘test, trace and isolate’ procedures we have in place. The Senior Clinical and Public Health Advisory Group keeps ‘review of the arrangements for repatriation’ as a standing item on its agenda. I have copied in Dr Rosalind Ranson, Medical Director, to ensure that your email is shared with the Group and taken into consideration when this is next discussed.
Kind regards, Henrietta
Dr Henrietta Ewart Director of Public Health
Public Health Directorate, Cabinet Office, Isle of Man Government, Cronk Coar, Strang, Douglas, IM4 4RJ. [Contact details redacted]
From: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Sent: 14 May 2020 17:47 To: Ewart, Henrietta Subject: Medical advice
Dear Dr Ewart
I hope you don’t mind me contacting you directly, as even after reflection I remain confused about the relationship between our current data and decision making regarding returning residents.
145 Just to reprise the facts: New case numbers have been “green”, indeed virtually non-existent for the last week at least. We have plentiful hospital capacity, which is still at enhanced levels We have plentiful ICU capacity which is still at enhanced levels Our test and trace capacity is significantly underutilised No significant additional flow through effects expected based on policy decisions. (The last significant decision was on re-opening the construction sector, which has had a significant time to flow through into case numbers.) Returning residents are restricted to 30 per week A proportion of these will be travelling as a complete household (but that statistic has not been made available) The risk profile is the same for anyone returning from the UK, irrespective of their reason (although I accept that patient transfer measures may mitigate this risk). Some key workers are able to isolate at home (numbers unknown) 5,000 or so have been returned to economic activity supported by medical advice on the risks, provided social distancing is maintained.
Before we start to reduce our ICU / hospital capacity in light of negligible demand, surely it makes sense to bring back these residents?
Why would restricting an entire household to home quarantine be an adequate preventative measure to control the reproduction rate?
Can you confirm that no assessment is made of the physical or mental health of returning residents in order to make a balanced decision on medical risk grounds?
I would be interested to learn more about what objective and subjective considerations have been given to this, to better understand the advice that is frequently cited by Council of Ministers. I hope you will not mind me asking it of you direct as the only person qualified to give it.
Yours sincerely
The Hon. Juan Watterson BA(Hons) BFP FRSA FCA CMgr FCMI SHK Speaker of the House of Keys Member of the House of Keys for Rushen Legislative Buildings Douglas ISLE OF MAN IM1 3PW
Twitter: @juanwatterson Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/juan.watterson
146 Appendix 12: 24th May 2020 – Email from Geoffrey Allen to H M Attorney General
147 148 Archived: 27 May 2020 13:12:05 From: [Juan Watterson SHK] Sent: 25 May 2020 12:08:41 To: [Emergency Scrutiny] Subject: FW: Emergency Regulations Sensitivity: Normal
From: Geoffrey Allen Sent: 24 May 2020 20:58 To: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Cc: Barber, Clare (MHK); Caine, Daphne (MHK); Lawrie Hooper; Shimmins, Bill (MHK) Subject: Fwd: Emergency Regulations
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Geoffrey Allen Subject: Emergency Regulations Date: 24 May 2020 at 17:16:00 GMT+1 To: "Quinn, John"
Dear Attorney General,
This is an extract from an email you sent to me on the 28th April 2020:-
‘The legal effect of the Isle of Man’s Emergency Regulations is that, where they apply, they will take precedence over the ordinarily applicable domestic rules. This is the consequence of an extraordinary state of emergency which is predicated on public health and public safety grounds, particularly with respect to older people or those living with underlying health conditions. The Isle of Man Government has positive obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (implemented here by our Human Rights Act 2001) to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk to life posed by the current outbreak. It is the advice of the Attorney General that the steps which have been taken are lawful under the state of emergency. They are necessary, proportionate and time limited.’
This is an extract from an email I received from David Ashford regarding the use of members the Isle of Man Constabulary to carry welfare checks on returning residents who are allowed to quarantine other in their own homes:-
"…...as part of the recommendation the police confirmed they could undertake welfare visits. Welfare visits form part of the policy for all returning residents in self isolation which is able to put in place under 7(3)(a)(ii) of the Entry Restrictions Regulations to satisfy the Chief Secretary that an exemption notice can be issued in the first place. The ability for such visits to be undertake is also linked by 10(4)(c) of the Infectious Persons Regulations which requires anyone self isolating to provide details so that contact can be made with them during the period of isolation and Section 14 of the same regulations allows such visits to be undertaken by the 149 Police.”
My wife and I received a welfare check at my home on the 22nd May. It consisted of 2 police officers standing in my garden and engaging in conversation from around 10 meters away. One asked me if I was Mr Allen and didn’t speak with my wife. He said they were there for a welfare check and asked me if I needed anything. I said not and they left. We were not given any indication by any government official that a welfare check was likely. I am aware of at least 6 similar welfare checks being carried out at the homes of residents who returned on the13th May.
In the case of such a returning resident refusing the answer the door to a police officer or even acknowledging his presence, Mr Ashford’s reply indicates that the police would have a power of entry into the premises to carry out a welfare check.
For your information I have asked the Data Protection Registrar for his comments regarding the sharing of my information with the Constabulary for such a purpose.
In view of his email to me on the 28th April, is it still the opinion of the Attorney General that the Police carrying out welfare checks under the provisions of The Infectious Persons Regulations is a) lawful b) necessary and c) proportionate and does he agree with my interpretation of the police powers of entry in such circumstances?
Warm regards
Geoff Allen
Isle of Man. Giving you freedom to flourish
WARNING: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. You must not copy or deliver it to any other person or use the contents in any unauthorised manner without the express permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, please delete it and notify the sender as soon as possible.
No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of any of the Departments or Statutory Boards of the Isle of Man Government with any party by e-mail without express written confirmation by a Manager of the relevant Department or Statutory Board.
RAAUE: S’preevaadjagh yn çhaghteraght post-l shoh chammah’s coadanyn erbee currit marish as ta shoh coadit ec y leigh. Cha nhegin diu coipal ny cur eh da peiagh erbee elley ny ymmydey yn chooid t’ayn er aght erbee dyn kied leayr veih’n choyrtagh. Mannagh nee shiu yn enmyssagh kiarit jeh’n phost-l shoh, doll-shiu magh eh, my sailliu, as cur-shiu fys da’n choyrtagh cha leah as oddys shiu.
Cha nel kied currit da failleydagh ny jantagh erbee conaant y yannoo rish peiagh ny possan erbee lesh post-l er son Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh erbee jeh Reiltys Ellan Vannin dyn co-niartaghey scruit leayr veih Reireyder y Rheynn ny Boayrd Slattyssagh t’eh bentyn rish.
150 Appendix 13: 25th May 2020 – Email from Geoffrey Allen to Tynwald Members: correspondence between Geoffrey Allen and Hon. David Ashford MHK
151 152 From: Watterson, Juan (SHK) Sent: 25 May 2020 12:06 To: Emergency Scrutiny Subject: FW: Repatriation and Civil Rights
From: Geoffrey Allen Sent: 25 May 2020 09:27 To: Chief Minister; Cannan, Alfred (MHK); Thomas, Chris (Tynwald); Cregeen, Graham; Skelly, Laurence (MHK); Harmer, Ray (MHK); Allinson, Alex (MHK); Boot, Geoffrey (MHK) Cc: Watterson, Juan (SHK); Moorhouse, Jason (MHK); Baker, Tim (MHK); Corlett, Ann (MHK); Barber, Clare (MHK); Robertshaw, Chris (MHK); Peake, Ralph; Costain, Kate (MHK); Caine, Daphne (MHK); Perkins, Martyn; Shimmins, Bill (MHK); Callister, Rob; Edge, Julie (MHK); Lawrie Hooper; Bishop of Sodor and Man; Henderson, Bill; Poole- Wilson, Jane (MLC); Lord-Brennan, Kate (MLC); August-Hanson, Tanya (MLC); Sharpe, Kerry (MLC); Maska, Marlene; Greenhill, Peter (MLC); Mercer, Robert (MLC) Subject: Repatriation and Civil Rights
Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please take care before opening any attachments or following any links.
Dear Members of Tynwald
This is an email exchange between myself and the Health Minister over the past couple of days. I really hope you can find the time to read it. Thank you and warm regards
Geoff Allen
There is one thing I don’t think we ever got to the bottom of. It goes back to the “2 returning residents with the virus not self isolating could lead to 100 cases in a week and 1000 in 2 weeks"
If I agree to differ with the numbers of cases from the Channel Islands not being comparable because of the different testing regimes and even if I accept the Jersey estimate of 3000 cases why didn’t Jersey or Guernsey have the explosion of cases which your medical modelling indicated ie over 10,000 cases in 3 weeks and rising?
Are you also saying that Guernsey’s death rate is not comparable?
Warm regards
Geoff
153 Dear Mr Allen,
The modelling of the virus uncontrolled was the same in Guernsey and Jersey. That is how the virus multiples if measures are not taken to prevent spread. Jersey and Guernsey did not see uncontrolled transmission as they did exactly the same as us introduced social distancing, lockdown, household and movement controls etc. That’s what stops uncontrolled spread.
Actually David. They didn’t do exactly the same as us. They didn’t stop their residents from returning and they didn’t put their residents into a forced quarantine.
This is what is on the Jersey Covid website as I type:-
Guidance for travellers:
solo travellers, who live alone, should immediately go into isolation a family or group travelling together should all immediately go into isolation where a solo traveller is returning to a shared or family home and is not showing any symptoms of infection, they should separate themselves from others in the home in accordance with self-isolation advice for 14 days. Family members should strictly follow home isolation advice where a solo traveller is returning to a shared or family home has or develops symptoms of coronavirus, their whole household must self-isolate in accordance with the household isolation guidance
So if they are using the same medical modelling why are solo travellers permitted to self isolate in a shared family home?
Dear Mr Allen,
Because as an independent jurisdiction they are entitled to make their own decisions and decide what they believe are appropriate risks just the same as the Isle of Man is. I do however know from talking to political counterparts in Jersey many of them have expressed the view that they believe Jersey should have followed the border closure we instituted.
Yes David but they didn’t close the border to residents. Yet they and Guernsey are in no worse position than we are. Fortunately for their returning residents they didn’t just follow whatever their clinicians said. Otherwise they would have police officers knocking on the doors of innocent men and women. They would have hundreds of people being subject to anxiety and financial worries. But they haven’t have they?
What a number of Jersey politicians now think is meaningless. I know of 16 local politicians who do not agree with your policy regarding returning residents so your point is irrelevant.
There has been 1 new case all week and 9 active cases amongst a population of 85000 and yet still you follow the advice of clinicians to the detriment of so many people. You still listen to the clinicians who think you should wait another week before making a decision about the repatriation of residents.
154
So why don't you tell us all why the clinicians think that allowing residents to self isolate is such a danger to the island community in general or to the Health Services. Why do the clinicians think Isle of Man residents are more of a danger than the residents of Jersey or Guernsey.? Why do the clinicians think we should wait yet another week? After all you now have the experience of around 150 returning residents who are virus free..
I know we are in unchartered waters. But never in my lifetime did I ever expect to see a group of politicians abrogate their responsibilities by slavishly following everything a group of unelected and unaccountable people advise them to do. Never in my lifetime did I think I would see the police given powers to force entry into a home to carry out a welfare check, on the advice of another unelected and unaccountable public health official. Never in my lifetime did I ever think I would see a government using the block vote to force through measures following advice of the same group of unelected and unaccountable people. Votes on these matters should be free and secretive, particularly as they are on matters permitted through a State of Emergency.
The scary thing is what comes next? Forced vaccination of all our children because the clinicians think it is a good idea? You have already passed laws taking away the rights of householders as to how many people they can allow into their homes. You have already passed laws riding roughshod over civil liberties and our freedom. You have passed laws turning a hotel into a detention centre. You have disregarded a United Nations Convention and explained it away as an oversight. You allow a civil servant, another unelected and unaccountable person to decide who can come here and who can’t. You allow unelected and unaccountable people to decide what the national speed limit should be. You have made it easier for a person to be detained under the Mental Health Legislation. You passed a law banning public sector employees from leaving the island. Oddly enough that was revoked just 7 days later. I wonder why?
No need to respond David. I just hope it gives you pause for thought about who really is running the Isle of Man at the moment.
I hope you don’t find this email insulting or disrespectful. I am telling you the facts, not my interpretation or my opinion about them. I am concerned that under the leadership of the Chief Minister the government is blindly following the clinicians where they want to take you. Has anyone in government wondered about their agenda? Has anyone asked why the politicians Jersey and Guernsey chose to take their own path? I say again, look where they are now and look where their returning residents are now?
Warm regards
Geoff Allen
155 Parliamentary Copyright
Available from:
The Tynwald Library Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS Isle of Man, IM1 3PW British Isles December 2020
Tel: 01624 685520 E-mail: [email protected] Price: £19.00