Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A ‘GREEN LIST’ for countries to which it is safe to travel will be published on Monday, Taoiseach Michéal Martin confirmed this evening.
The Government and the National Public Health Emergency Team said, however, that its advice against all non-essential travel remains.
Speaking this evening following a Cabinet meeting, Martin confirmed that the long-mooted Green List will be published next week and will be kept under review every two weeks.
The Taoiseach said there will be an increased presence of staff at ports and airports to ensure incoming passengers are made aware of their obligations, including restriction of movement for 14 days.
It comes after days of concern regarding international travel into Ireland and quarantine measures for visitors and people returning – and a rise in Covid-19 cases in recent weeks.
The Taoiseach said he understood that anxiety some people had about people travelling into the country from hot spots.
Health Minister Stephen Donnelly also said the total number of the Covid cases among those travelling from the United States, in the last six weeks, is four. These people tested positive upon arrival in Ireland.
His comments come after Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney addressed recent concerns about US flights landing in Ireland.
“We have between 200-250 people a day arriving from the US,” said Coveney. “That’s in the context of about 4,500 people a day arriving into Ireland. The majority of those people are Irish people coming home.
“One of the flights from Dallas which has been the subject of some attention from the media and social media – there were only 16 people on that flight is my understanding,” he said yesterday.
Donnelly said the success of stemming the spread of Covid-19 so far is down to collective effort, and that Ireland has one of the lowest prevalence of coronavirus in Europe.
Martin said the numbers in Ireland are still very low compared to other countries, but said “they take very seriously the advice from NPHET”.
The Taoiseach said believes “it is the right thing to do to press the pause button”.
Earlier today, health officials confirmed two further deaths due to Covid-19 in Ireland and 14 new cases.
This evening, the Government confirmed that the reopening of pubs and nightclubs is set to be pushed back until 10 August following a meeting of Cabinet ministers today.
Cabinet ministers agreed to postpone the reopening of pubs under Phase 4 from 20 July to 10 August.
The move comes after serious concerns were raised at a meeting of the National Public Health Emergency Team on the re-opening of pubs, given the rising number of cases of Covid-19 in the country.
The Taoiseach also said that face coverings are to be made mandatory in shops, following a meeting of cabinet this evening.
Face coverings will now be mandatory in shops for both shoppers and staff, unless a screen is in place. Regulations to make this measure mandatory are yet to be drafted.
At a briefing this evening, Martin said: “Pubs, hotel bars, nightclubs and casinos will remain closed until 10 August. Pubs and bars which are already operating and serving food can remain open once they are fully compliant with the public health guidance.”
Some of the most recent cases have originated from clusters in congregated settings, and it is feared that Ireland is not yet ready to move to the next stage of re-opening the economy.
With reporting from Christina Finn
Why does somebody have to die before anything is done in this country? RIP
It’s not just “this country”.
Sad, but true.
Considering this, how Ireland got onto the EU Human Rights Council recently is beyond me!
apologies UN Human Rights Council
Because they passed a bill which gives the UN the right to bring in any law into ireland on any day of the week and their is sweet fuk all we can do!
If it does turn out that her death could have been avoided, if the legislation had been enacted, ( which seems likely ), and if her death, in turn leads to the legislation finally being enacted to prevent this avoidable tragedy ever happening again, then I think it is incumbent upon us to at least honour her memory in some way. While I’m not normally a fan of associating victims names with laws, I think in this case it might be the right thing to do. So, premature as my suggestion is, if the legislation is enacted, perhaps we should consider calling it Savitas law in her memory.
plus 1
This would be just a lovely idea . Savinna’s law . I am sure her husband and family would have to agree .
Way past time for the government to be hiding behind an expert group to chicken out of complying with its own Supreme Court’s decision.
Reading comments here and on other places, I’ve never seen anything anger the (at least online) population so much. If they avoided it as a populist agenda before, they’ll be we’ll served addressing it now. While no political party can raise this as a political issue as it was avoided for 20 years, its incumbent amongst all the parties to raise it now as no one in the country wants to see a death attributable again to the catholic ethos. The issue of it only being a lifestyle choice has tragically now clearly been put to bed and The pro life religious groups would do well to keep their heads below the parapet on this one.
Catherine
There was a time when the goal of respectability was enough for everyone and particularly at a time when poverty stalked our land. The use of vulgarity and foul language which comes so easy to you would then have cost you even that status.
because we are a nation of cowards
Not really…..the cowards just always seem to be in charge.
We didn’t need legislation to save this poor woman’s life. It seems to me that the medics involved were reticent to progress to termination either because they feared some backlash, they were confused or they had some religious or moral conviction against it. In any case it’s inexcusable. We now need to sort this out. Legislate for abortion rights now.
Declan – You start with “we don’t need” and finish with “legislate now”.
We do need legislation for this precisely because medics have to confront these issues. By legislating no doctor will ever need to question their actions on cases like this.
Our constitution has been argued by both sides of the pro-life/pro-choice debate as supporting their point. This means that any medic who takes a stand either way may put themselves at risk of ending up in front of a judge who will interpret the poorly worded constitution subjectively. Right now, that’s all there is and in the absence of legislation it will always be that poor wording that is put under the subjective microscope.
Convenient that reilly says that he only got this report in 24 hours .
Eileen are you suggesting that the Taoiseach and the Minister for Health lied about the date on which an Official Report was received by State or are you just using irony to make your points.
Garry Fitzgerald
Not at all . I am so very sorry if you have misunderstood my comment .
I am not suggesting anything of the kind . I am saying in plain English that
the taoiseach and the minister for health are liars and are lying through their
teeth as they have done and continue to do since they came into power in
the government .
I hope this clears up any confusion you may have :)
Ireland 2012 still suffering the fallout from the Catholic Churches iron grip on this nation. Disgusting and shocking after all the damage this organisation has inflicted on this nation to be still able to influence the decision makers within our society. Progress?…
If anyone bothered to listen to her husband or READ the original story the woman did NOT ask for an abortion, she asked for labour to be induced which was declined by the medical profession as it is considered a medical termination once there is a heartbeat present, even though her baby would not have survived at 17 weeks gestation. Her waters had broken 2 days previously and she was open to infection, her death is a direct result of her NOT being given prophylactic antibiotics on case of the possibility of infection because there WAS no guidelines in place for antibiotics prior to 32 weeks gestation. Antibiotics given within 8 hours of the rupture of membranes may have saved her. I say may because I do not know for sure but it bears investigating. As to the miscarriage, in cases like this the legislation needs to be changed to allow for induction when there is no hope of saving the child.
Seriously Patrick…. Have you not read about this horrific nightmare ? I can’t understand it … Then again I can…the ,catholic churches influence on all areas of social policy is still in existence in 2012. I initially thought that this lady died due to the inequalities in our health service. I thought maybe that she didn’t have health insurance.., this would have been bad enough but to die because this ” is a catholic country” is just unbelievable. I’m absolutely appalled. RIP
I feel there is alot more going on as 2 women died in 48 hours in the Coombe hospital after giving birth, While of course this case is horrific I think the hospitals are at a crisis point…and I would question the doctors decision..Was it down to law or budget?
This was an emergency situation! wtf do you think she was doing?
tv news said 500 protesters, as usual they cut numbers’
Inappropriate comment of the year award.
No Pat. She was a dentist and no woman, asylum seeker or not, should have to endure that.
@ Patrick, I’m sorry, do you think asylum seekers or non nationals are second class citizens that don’t deserve to be cared for?? It wasn’t that long ago that Irish ppl were on a boat out of here looking for a better life!! The famine, the 80′s… Last week!! Get your backward head out of the dark ages. RIP Savita and condolences to her family.
What if she was an asylum seeker Patrick. What would have been your reaction? That it was her own fault? That she shouldn’t come to Ireland to have an abortion, that she was was a sponger? What, you little pr**k, would have been your reaction!??
Calmed down a bit now…. FYI as far as I understood she was a dentist.
She might still be alive if the Catholic Church didn’t have a say in medical science in this country. That’s all anyone needs to know.
It’s not like they weren’t warned. Sickening.
It is first noted that the ground upon which a woman can seek a lawful abortion in Ireland is expressed in broad terms: Article 40.3.3, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the X case, provides that an abortion is available in Ireland if it is established as a matter of probability that there is a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of the mother, including a risk of self harm, which can only be avoided by a termination of the pregnancy (the X case, cited at paragraphs 39-44 above). While a constitutional provision of this scope is not unusual, no criteria or procedures have been subsequently laid down in Irish law, whether in legislation, case law or otherwise, by which that risk is to be measured or determined, leading to uncertainty as to its precise application. Indeed, while this constitutional provision (as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the X case) qualified sections 58 and 59 of the earlier 1861 Act (see paragraph 145 above), those sections have never been amended so that, on their face, they remain in force with their absolute prohibition on abortion and associated serious criminal offences thereby contributing to the lack of certainty for a woman seeking a lawful abortion in Ireland.
Moreover, whether or not the broad right to a lawful abortion in Ireland for which Article 40.3.3 provides could be clarified by Irish professional medical guidelines as suggested by the Government (and see the High Court judgment in MR v. TR and Others, at paragraph 97 above), the guidelines do not in any event provide any relevant precision as to the criteria by which a doctor is to assess that risk. The Court cannot accept the Government’s argument that the oral submissions to the Committee on the Constitution, and still less obstetric guidelines on ectopic pregnancies from another State, could constitute relevant clarification of Irish law. In any event, the three conditions noted in those oral submissions as accepted conditions requiring medical intervention to save a woman’s life (pre-eclampsia, cancer of the cervix and ectopic pregnancies) were not pertinent to the third applicant’s case.
Furthermore, there is no framework whereby any difference of opinion between the woman and her doctor or between different doctors consulted, or whereby an understandable hesitancy on the part of a woman or doctor, could be examined and resolved through a decision which would establish as a matter of law whether a particular case presented a qualifying risk to a woman’s life such that a lawful abortion might be performed.
what was she doing here asking for an abortion….what was the doctor’s professional opinion?
have you actually bothered to read up on the story?
Read the story Patrick
She was asking for her life to be saved, when it was obvious that her child’s life could not be saved. Is that clear enough?.
What an ignorant comment, you must be some sort of idiot, can you not be bothered to even read the article before posting stupid pure ignorant comments?
So in the space of 4 hours between comments, you still couldn’t be bothered to look up on the story. Are you just waiting for today’s Sun or Daily Mail for your news?
have your say