Martin Conway (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. Of course, nobody wants to put these measures through. Mandatory quarantining was seen as trendy because it had worked in other countries. People who called for mandatory quarantining probably did not appreciate the absolute consequences of it, but it works and has worked. The Minister outlined the figures including 59 people with Covid-19 variants, which had they circulated within our community would mean many more thousands of cases and, sadly, fatalities. It was a big price for those 59 people to pay, as it was for the 4,000 people who found themselves in mandatory quarantining, but it was necessary. In the fullness of time, when the history books are written and a review of the Covid pandemic is carried out, it will be seen that while it was a restrictive measure and, indeed, among the most restrictive in Europe, it was taken in good faith and done to some extent because of significant political pressure from the Opposition. It will be seen as one of the key measures that helped us in fighting this pandemic.

When a country needs to come off the list, it should do so. The Minister has not delayed in taking countries off the list when they were deemed not to be the risk they previously were. Similarly, the Minister and his advisors have not been afraid of adding countries to the list when that was deemed necessary. Like everything else, it is necessary to take a flexible approach to mandatory quarantining. A flexible approach is necessary in putting countries on, and taking them off, the list.

I ask the Minister to reflect on the appeals process in his summing up. We saw some very tough cases that went to appeal. Some of them, thankfully, resolved themselves because the people involved ended up having negative tests or vaccinations and so on.However, there were some very difficult cases that did not necessarily succeed. Certainly at the beginning of mandatory quarantine, the appeal system was so rigid, strict and defined that it became irrelevant because so few people succeeded in having the decision to enter them into mandatory quarantine overturned. Perhaps the Minister will talk to us a little about the appeal process and if there is humanity, compassion and slight flexibility in it. Too much flexibility goes against the principle of mandatory hotel quarantine and the reasons and rationale behind it. However, in a situation where somebody is returning home because one of his or her parents is about to die within days, there is a strong argument that compassion and flexibility should enter the system, provided the person in question has demonstrated a negative PCR test. If we lose compassion and humanity, and the flexibility that brings compassion and humanity, the system can be justifiably criticised but too much flexibility goes against the principle of mandatory hotel quarantine and what people are trying to achieve with this difficult and tough measure.

I pay tribute to the people who are working in the hotels accommodating mandatory quarantine because it is not an easy job. It is difficult because those workers are not allowing people the type of flexibility we all take for granted in life. It is not an easy job but they are doing it in the interests of our State and the health of our nation. I salute them.