By Conall Hirsh-
Accounts gathered from several travellers, all of whom have recently come back into the UK from Amber list countries, raise questions into whether the Track and Trace program spearheaded by the now disgraced and resigned Matt Hancock, is actually effective at forcing travelers to self-isolate.
Several loopholes in the system exist, have another instance where there seems to have been a lack of transparency in the Government’s alleged travel policy pertaining to Covid-19.
With Hancock now out of the picture, things appear to be falling back into place gradually. Restrictions are suddenly on track to completely end, and upon reflection, the track and trace system he headed wasn’t allit was trumped up to be.
Jack Springer, 20, an American Politics student studying at the University of Leeds, recently came back to the U.K. after going home to visit his family. He described the isolation process mandated by the Government and the major loopholes he noticed which lead him to conclude the program was not as effective as previously thought.
‘I do not believe the system is working to make people actually complete the isolation, and I have very little reason to believe that they are effectively tracking us’ he said.
Jack explained the process he needed to complete in order to fly from his home in the United States back to Britain during the pandemic.
‘I needed to pay for a Day 2 and Day 8 PCR tests for when I came back which had unique reference numbers specific to me, and then include them on my Passenger Locator Form.’
All travellers flying from an Amber list country must isolate upon their arrival into the UK for 10 days, testing themselves on Day 2 and 8 of their isolation. The Government stated that if travellers break isolation rules, they may be subject to up to £10,000 in fines. Travellers may also choose to pay for a day 5 ‘Test to Release’ test, which upon receiving a negative result allows them to leave isolation early.
Jack flew into Heathrow Airport on June 16th, and said that the border force was relatively normal, despite the new restrictions and additional documents. He believed the stringency of the Passenger Locator Form was evidence of the Government’s diligence to accurately track international arrivals.
‘The Border agents were still efficient and polite to me when I was entering the country. I showed them my Passenger locator form, which is very extensive and included the specific testing reference numbers, as well as the address where I was going to isolate. All these details I believed would be used to track me and keep me in isolation, but now I believe that these are simply scare tactics to discourage you from breaking isolation.’
Jack said he was initially very worried about breaking isolation: he stayed in his student house from the 16th and isolated for a full week until receiving his second negative result. However. he discerned based on the interaction with the track and trace program that they realistically had no way to keep him in isolation, except for the threat of fines.
‘For the first few days, they usually called me at a random time. They state that they’re from Track and Trace, but the questions they ask you are peculiar. They ask only to confirm your name and year of birth, not the address you’re isolating at.
‘Then they would just read a very generic script about the isolation period, asking to confirm if I knew I needed to isolate and if I was isolating at the address I stated on the locator form, but they never actually confirm the address you’ve given.’
He said their lack of thoroughness struck him as odd, but his interactions with them over the next few days confirmed his suspicions.
‘I genuinely believe the program is meant to scare you as opposed to actually force you to isolate. I don’t think they have the resources to realistically to make sure you are isolating.’
Jack stated that over the next few days, the callers from Track and Trace failed to confirm his negative test result on Day 2.
‘I was under the impression that once I sent my test to the laboratory, they would inform the government of the result and my data would go into some database. But instead, after day two the callers asked me if I’d taken the test, which was very strange as I believed they should have known that already. I mean, every single form you fill out says “Are you okay with us [the testing company] sharing your data with PHE and Track and Trace,” but apparently the system is not nearly as sophisticated as we have been told.’
‘The nail in the coffin that made me seriously doubt the system worked was on day three or four, I think. They called me like normal, but they asked me what my test result was for day two! It was shocking to me because I’d already gotten the result from the lab a day prior, and they should have had access to the information themselves. But the fact that they didn’t, including that they had to ask me what the result was, struck me as very alarming.’
‘I happened to be negative because I was safe while I travelled and isolated when I came back, but I don’t think they could have done anything to force me to actually stay inside. Perhaps if I tested positive the lab would have informed the government and it would have been different, but because I was negative but I think they used only the bare minimum resources to track me. All of this lead me to believe that the system is much more discombobulated than we’ve been told.’
Jack’s account raises many questions about the effectiveness of the program being able to track international arrivals. Jack happened to be negative and not carry the virus, but if he had tested negative on day 2 and then gone out and contracted the virus, there would be virtually no way for Track and Trace to identify this.
If the only methods employed by the program for tracking travelers are daily phone calls and occasional text messages, there isn’t much stopping Travelers from breaking rules of self isolation And if they do go out and break isolation, they would have no incentive to abide by the Track and Trace check ins tha.t are often required when visiting a restaurant or pub now. If they were to become asymptomatically infected, how would they know until testing on day 8. At present, this seems like a significant loophole in the Track and Trace program’s ability to monitor international arrivals.
A pattern of deception
The Department of Health’s policies, including the rules surrounding international arrivals being monitored by Track and Trace seem to be less effective than we are being led to believe. If this is true, it raises even more questions about the Government’s handling of the pandemic.
Is there more that’s being played down to salvage political capitol for the PM and his cabinet? If the Track and Trace program is not as robust as the government purports, could this be why the Delta variant has managed to slip into Britain despite the travel restrictions?
If the restrictions are not as effective as we’re being told, then what’s the tangible benefit for leaving them in place when they evidently contain serious loopholes? And if the restrictions are not delivering a clear benefit to keep Covid cases low, how are they beneficial to the public?
These allegations give a slim but distinct glimpse into the incompetence of the Health Secretary and the programs he is responsible for.
Additionally, the current iteration of travel restrictions (the harshest yet) only came into effect in March is a question that calls for honest answers Why they were not more stringent during the peak of the second waved in December and January? Logically they should be loosened in conjunction with the growing number of vaccinated adults, but they have remained very strict. Wouldn’t they have been more effective earlier in the pandemic?
The conflicting reports coming from Downing Street, as well as the accusations levied by Cummings against Cummings, mire the cabinet in a slew of Covid related inconsistencies.
These conflicting reports, as well as the seemingly illogical travel policies gives the impression that cabinet under Matt Hancock have been making it up as they’ve gone along, to the detriment of the country.
Thankfully, we now have a new Health Secretary in Sajid Javid, who appears more promising than Hancock, and now doing his best to return life bac to normal.
P.S : Conall Hirsch is a 20 year old second year English and Philosophy student at Leeds University