Stranded boaties in 'dire' situation appeal for New Zealand's help

[Fish 0]

Fairly well put and compelling story here on RNZ:

Rear Commodore of the Island Cruising Club, Chair of the NZ Marine Operators Association and general manager of the Bay of Island Marina are lobbying to allow Pacific cruising yachts into NZ ahead of cyclone season. Claiming humanitarian and compelling need.

I'd say they present a good arguement. There is a low risk of C19 from these guys, they should be easy to manage an effective isolation regime, and they do add to the economy. I don't think it would be right to keep the borders closed to these people and then sit back and see how many get pasted in cyclones this season.

But, to be fair, complaining the cost of entering Fiji is too high isn't a good look. They state the alternative is abandoning their 'houses', so $1,000 to enter Fiji sounds cheap to me. It would be most likely the MoH would require them to stay in a secure isolation facility for 14 days once they arrive, at a cost of $3,500. (with the boat parked in a secure marina or quarantine berth with associated fees). Given the number of escapees out of secure facilities, I can't see any govt department letting anyone just stay on a boat and promise not to leave it. Just for public perception and fairness to everyone locked in quarantine facilities, at the least.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/422509/stranded-boaties-in-dire-situation-appeal-for-new-zealand-s-help

[Black Panther 1,688]

Do what fiji does and accept time on passage as time in quarantine. Easy.

[markm 30]

I disagree Fish.

It is not a humanitarian issue as they claim, it's a fiscal issue.  They can get off their boats if they consider the risk of cyclones too high.  That they don't want to lose their boats I completely understand, that this is a humanitarian issue New Zealand is somehow responsible for dealing with is politely, a stretch.  It's a cost issue and in the overall scheme of people being financially hurt by CV19, one that's quite a long way down on my sympathy list.

And 4000km between NZ and Aus, really, did NZ or Aus move sometime while I had my back turned?

 

They may have got sympathy from me, if they were actually honest with their case and the facts.

[dutyfree 170]

16 minutes ago, Knot Me... maybe said:

Agree with Mark.

There are a growing number of offshore reports and comments coming up about 'head to NZ, it's soft touch'.

 

Maybe that's a reflection of the writers navigation skills.

4000km, depends whether you are sailing upwind or reaching

[darkside 63]

When was the last time Tahiti got hit by a cyclone?

Helps with the dramatic headline I guess.

 

[Black Panther 1,688]

I sat through 2 cyclones at anchor in Tahiti. 

[Black Panther 1,688]

In spite of hos overly emotive style and poor navigation skills the fact remains that thare are 3-400 boats that would come here if possible and inject much needed money into a lot of marine businesses, particularly in opua and Whangarei. Regards covid they would be just about the safest group of travelers on the planet.  

So why not??

[Dtwo 157]

41 minutes ago, Black Panther said:

In spite of hos overly emotive style and poor navigation skills the fact remains that thare are 3-400 boats that would come here if possible and inject much needed money into a lot of marine businesses, particularly in opua and Whangarei. Regards covid they would be just about the safest group of travelers on the planet.  

So why not??

Agree. Local small businesses rely on some cruising income.  If they can let in superyachts, what is the difference.

[grant 44]

11 hours ago, Black Panther said:

Do what fiji does and accept time on passage as time in quarantine. Easy.

NZ will also accept time at sea as part of quarantine, have looked closely enough if there is a difference between shipping and recreational boats but I believe 28 days is the required time for stepping off without quarantine

[darkside 63]

Found it, Cyclone Venna 1983 was the last time for hurricane force wins (64kn) in Tahiti.

Roughly as likely as getting hit in NZ according to NIWA.

 

[Black Panther 1,688]

The problem isn't cyclones in FP. It is that the authorities insist they leave. Then where to?

 

I was in Huahine for  Venna. Papeete for  Nisha and got another at sea up near the Marquesas. Tough year 1983.

[Ex Machina 384]

15 hours ago, Dtwo said:

Agree. Local small businesses rely on some cruising income.  If they can let in superyachts, what is the difference.

Good point . If the rich and famous are allowed to get their boats serviced and make their movies here ,  why not cruisers not cruisers arriving from Covid free islands ? .

I think the spending is spread far wider with cruisers than with superyachts . The big boat refit industry is restricted to a few major players who outsource to a select few specialists . It will be interesting to see where the new refit hub/hubs evolve with the squeeze going on at orams to move the refit work out of there .

[darkside 63]

I agree they should be allowed to come. I just get annoyed by inflated risk and hardship arguments used to push the agenda.

Much like the US team shipping their AC boat here, away from the northern hemisphere summer, and then squealing "you have to let us in". It will take them a while to get some respect back after that outburst.

But really if Fiji can manage it surely we can. Perhaps a quarantine anchorage in Whangaroa while they wait for their first test results just to be sure?

[Black Panther 1,688]

To reach NZ from Papeete in 14 days is faster than a lot of cruising boats can travel  (6.5kn)

[Romany 162]

No doubt this should allowed. In a global economy where scraps are increasingly becoming the main course,  we ought to be in like a hungry dog, but the question would be who to lobby to encourage fast tracking legislature change?- or is that too politicised to be allowed in this forum?

Imagine if the west island beat us to the draw - that would piss me off. why do FP local authorities insist on departure BP? 

 

[Fish 0]

So, if you are in governance, what do you do?

If you let people in from half a world away (Tahiti), who else do you have to let in? Half of India is clamouring to come back here. They already have established lives / family / jobs here apparently. Do those people have a greater claim to entry than cruising sailors in the Eastern Pacific?

Every foreign sailor already in NZ doesn't want to leave. All the back-packers etc don't want to leave. If you let these guys in for this summer, will they leave again next winter?

It is far easier to say no to everyone, than to say yes to some and no to others. Its the 'where do you draw the line' arguement, otherwise known as the thin end of the wedge. Much like our lockdown was a blanket everything lockdown, Victoria have had some random 'lockdown' with so many loopholes, it wasn't really a lockdown. It didn't work for them.

While a logical arguement (from our point of view) can be put to let these cruisers in, I suspect the governments answer will be no to everyone. If C 19 keeps on going how it looks, over half the world's population will be claiming a good reason to be let into NZ. So, no to everyone...

[Romany 162]

Fair comments Fish. 

[TazzyDevil 9]

24 minutes ago, Fish said:

So, if you are in governance, what do you do?

If you let people in from half a world away (Tahiti), who else do you have to let in? Half of India is clamouring to come back here. They already have established lives / family / jobs here apparently. Do those people have a greater claim to entry than cruising sailors in the Eastern Pacific?

Every foreign sailor already in NZ doesn't want to leave. All the back-packers etc don't want to leave. If you let these guys in for this summer, will they leave again next winter?

It is far easier to say no to everyone, than to say yes to some and no to others. Its the 'where do you draw the line' arguement, otherwise known as the thin end of the wedge. Much like our lockdown was a blanket everything lockdown, Victoria have had some random 'lockdown' with so many loopholes, it wasn't really a lockdown. It didn't work for them.

While a logical arguement (from our point of view) can be put to let these cruisers in, I suspect the governments answer will be no to everyone. If C 19 keeps on going how it looks, over half the world's population will be claiming a good reason to be let into NZ. So, no to everyone...

I think that is the moral hazard - there a lot of people that want to move here (especially from countries with no welfare/medical systems. A depression is a great time to be in a country where healthcare is free and there is state care. Many of those people have paid very little tax in NZ, they are simply trying to get here to take advantage of things now. If you let the cruisers come (who have other options like tying up their boats and flying home- they aren't in any real personal danger) then you are saying NZ is open and the flood begins, our services get overwhelmed and we all pay for it.

I get that they will spend  a bit of money but it's the over all cost that I'm sure the Government is weighing up.

It's a bit misleading to call the cruisers a humanitarian or safety crisis though.

 

[Dtwo 157]

58 minutes ago, Fish said:

So, if you are in governance, what do you do?

If you let people in from half a world away (Tahiti), who else do you have to let in? Half of India is clamouring to come back here. They already have established lives / family / jobs here apparently. Do those people have a greater claim to entry than cruising sailors in the Eastern Pacific?

Every foreign sailor already in NZ doesn't want to leave. All the back-packers etc don't want to leave. If you let these guys in for this summer, will they leave again next winter?

It is far easier to say no to everyone, than to say yes to some and no to others. Its the 'where do you draw the line' arguement, otherwise known as the thin end of the wedge. Much like our lockdown was a blanket everything lockdown, Victoria have had some random 'lockdown' with so many loopholes, it wasn't really a lockdown. It didn't work for them.

While a logical arguement (from our point of view) can be put to let these cruisers in, I suspect the governments answer will be no to everyone. If C 19 keeps on going how it looks, over half the world's population will be claiming a good reason to be let into NZ. So, no to everyone...

Good points, but - 

- already letting superyachts in if they have $50k pre-booked work

- safety is an issue, like it or not.  I am guessing but there's a strong chance that the cruising boat's insurance may not cover them sitting in FP during cyclone season.

 

Nobody wants Covid to get established here, but we should be looking at this situation and evaluating the relevant risks rather than conflating it with planeloads of people from virus infected countries.

[Fish 0]

6 minutes ago, Dtwo said:

Good points, but - 

- already letting superyachts in if they have $50k pre-booked work

- safety is an issue, like it or not.  I am guessing but there's a strong chance that the cruising boat's insurance may not cover them sitting in FP during cyclone season.

 

Nobody wants Covid to get established here, but we should be looking at this situation and evaluating the relevant risks rather than conflating it with planeloads of people from virus infected countries.

You hit the answer Dtwo, let these boats in if they have $50k of pre-booked work. I've no problem with that. Bear in mind these same people were complaining $1,000 was too much to go to Fiji.

But I am confused about your last point. I thought this was a humanitarian / safety issue. What has boat insurance got to do with that? If the arguement boils down to letting them in so they have valid boat insurance, tell them to piss off.