FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Vaccine politics- UK v EU quid pro quo.
Vaccine politics- UK v EU quid pro quo.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I think the EU deserve to be shown greater respect by us overall. I thought the UK contract was signed some time before the EU one but it's easy to be manipulated by the media, most of which is anti-EU. " Are we watching the same media? I think it is quite clear that the EU mishandled their negotiations with the vaccine companies, they botched the subsequent roll out and their politicians then added to the woes by questioning the efficacy of certain vaccines to such an extent that they have now turned public opinion against a key solution their problem. That is not an anti EU media issue - I think that is a well accepted fact. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. " Correct but the Uk and US have not exported any vaccines which they should have under contract | |||
"I think the EU deserve to be shown greater respect by us overall. I thought the UK contract was signed some time before the EU one but it's easy to be manipulated by the media, most of which is anti-EU. Are we watching the same media? I think it is quite clear that the EU mishandled their negotiations with the vaccine companies, they botched the subsequent roll out and their politicians then added to the woes by questioning the efficacy of certain vaccines to such an extent that they have now turned public opinion against a key solution their problem. That is not an anti EU media issue - I think that is a well accepted fact. " Source CNN Uk government signed its contract with AZ on August 28th , Eu was the day before/. Both on a best efforts to supply. | |||
"The AZ vaccine was researched and developed by Oxford University with UK government funding. The UK signed agreements with AZ and with Pfizer months ahead of the EU. The Pfizer vaccines are mainly but not entirely manufactured in Belgium. The AZ vaccines in many countries both within the EU and elsewhere (in UK and India for example). At the end of the day these are all COMMERCIAL contracts between companies, many of which are multi-national, and governments/health authorities etc. The problem with the EU was their insistence on centralising the procurement with their bureaucratic unelected commission who royally fucked everything up as usual. Member states realised this too late and then started to make their own arrangements...e.g. Poland sourcing unapproved vaccines from Russia and China. It is probably illegal for them (EU) to block shipments...but court cases to prove that could take years so would be pointless and the EU bully boys know that. #truecolours." See above the EU actually signed their contract before the UK, albeit a day. Source CNN- they asked for an FOI from the uk government on its contract with AZ. That’s why the EU published its contract with AZ in January- why do you think the UK government published their with redacted sections. | |||
"I think the EU deserve to be shown greater respect by us overall. I thought the UK contract was signed some time before the EU one but it's easy to be manipulated by the media, most of which is anti-EU. Are we watching the same media? I think it is quite clear that the EU mishandled their negotiations with the vaccine companies, they botched the subsequent roll out and their politicians then added to the woes by questioning the efficacy of certain vaccines to such an extent that they have now turned public opinion against a key solution their problem. That is not an anti EU media issue - I think that is a well accepted fact. " Just check up from answers below CNN got an FOI on the UK actually contract with AZ - it was signed a day after the EU | |||
| |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Correct but the Uk and US have not exported any vaccines which they should have under contract" Not true at all, Astra zenica have the contracts not the uk .Astra zenica have production plants in europe so there is no need to send vaccines from the uk production plant as they can supply them from there. The UK has bought vaccines from Pfizer which doesn't have ant production in the uk so are obliged to send them. You are falling for more brussels propaganda to deflect from their total fuck up of procurement. | |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Correct but the Uk and US have not exported any vaccines which they should have under contractNot true at all, Astra zenica have the contracts not the uk .Astra zenica have production plants in europe so there is no need to send vaccines from the uk production plant as they can supply them from there. The UK has bought vaccines from Pfizer which doesn't have ant production in the uk so are obliged to send them. You are falling for more brussels propaganda to deflect from their total fuck up of procurement." The contracts signed by the EU and UK differ with the UK contract being more binding and more specific then the Belgian one used by Brussels.  | |||
| |||
| |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. " Really? Think this is quite incorrect. | |||
| |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Correct but the Uk and US have not exported any vaccines which they should have under contractNot true at all, Astra zenica have the contracts not the uk .Astra zenica have production plants in europe so there is no need to send vaccines from the uk production plant as they can supply them from there. The UK has bought vaccines from Pfizer which doesn't have ant production in the uk so are obliged to send them. You are falling for more brussels propaganda to deflect from their total fuck up of procurement."  There is no defence of the Eu on this they as allways are jealous and bitter | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/" Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved. | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved." According to this article, the EU waived its right to take AstraZeneca to court if there are delivery delays and it also states that if AstraZeneca’s performance is “impeded by any such competing agreements, AstraZeneca shall not be deemed in breach” of its agreement with the EU. All the EU can do is hold back payments to AZ and postulate and bitch about how the UK has secured and rolled out their program etc etc. It was also interesting to read the differences between EU law and British law on contracts and how other companies like to use British law for this fact, presumably then the preference to trade under British law too. | |||
"Just wanting a broad opinion/ comments given the facts that the UK had received 9 million vaccines from the EU- which has no doubt saved lives. This has not been reciprocated by the UK. The US has not exported any of its vaccines either. Infact, Canada has been sourcing its vaccines from Belgium. The EU has exported 34 millions doses of vaccine- half its production total. The EU AZ contract was signs the day before the Uk on a ‘ best efforts to supply ‘ terms . The UK/ US have exported none - although entered into agreements to export vaccines. So this has lead to the EU requesting a cessation of vaccine exports- as there has been no quid pro quo. Is the UK in for a very harsh lesson? "Wrong , they ordered 2 months after the UK | |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Correct but the Uk and US have not exported any vaccines which they should have under contractNot true at all, Astra zenica have the contracts not the uk .Astra zenica have production plants in europe so there is no need to send vaccines from the uk production plant as they can supply them from there. The UK has bought vaccines from Pfizer which doesn't have ant production in the uk so are obliged to send them. You are falling for more brussels propaganda to deflect from their total fuck up of procurement. There is no defence of the Eu on this they as allways are jealous and bitter"
Thank God for Brexit otherwise we would be subject to their dithering to order the vaccine | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved." Why would AZ disclose any facts of another contract to a client (The EU)? If the EU didn't cross their T's and dot their I's then that is on them I'm afraid. | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved." Why would anyone disclose any contracts they have with others? I'd say that would cause other legal issues and possibly leave them open to litigation. I don't think they would have knowingly thought the EU was in any disadvantages. These have come about as a result of EU actions. What's been very clear out if this is the two legal systems are very different. | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved. Why would AZ disclose any facts of another contract to a client (The EU)? If the EU didn't cross their T's and dot their I's then that is on them I'm afraid." There is a conflict of interest clause in the contract I am afraid( as there is in the UK contract- it’s pretty standard stuff)- so it’s back onto AZ. So they would have to declare it. | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved. Why would AZ disclose any facts of another contract to a client (The EU)? If the EU didn't cross their T's and dot their I's then that is on them I'm afraid. There is a conflict of interest clause in the contract I am afraid( as there is in the UK contract- it’s pretty standard stuff)- so it’s back onto AZ. So they would have to declare it. " Where is the conflict of interest? I'm pretty sure if there was one that could allow the EU commission to legally enforce their contract then they would be used it. This is a simple case of 2 separate commercial contracts. One of which appears fully enforceable and one which appears a little lackadaisical. | |||
"The following article shows why the UK have failed better in actually getting delivery of AZ doses. https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/ Many thanks for the link, very interesting. It’s much worse than I thought. AZ negotiated a contract with the EU in bad faith as they gave terms to the UK which they knew would put the EU at a disadvantage and did not disclose these facts to the EU. This could get really messy for all parties involved. Why would AZ disclose any facts of another contract to a client (The EU)? If the EU didn't cross their T's and dot their I's then that is on them I'm afraid. There is a conflict of interest clause in the contract I am afraid( as there is in the UK contract- it’s pretty standard stuff)- so it’s back onto AZ. So they would have to declare it. Where is the conflict of interest? I'm pretty sure if there was one that could allow the EU commission to legally enforce their contract then they would be used it. This is a simple case of 2 separate commercial contracts. One of which appears fully enforceable and one which appears a little lackadaisical." I think they have clauses to trigger for a breach of contract so yes ..... that’s where we are now. | |||
"Just wanting a broad opinion/ comments given the facts that the UK had received 9 million vaccines from the EU- which has no doubt saved lives. This has not been reciprocated by the UK. The US has not exported any of its vaccines either. Infact, Canada has been sourcing its vaccines from Belgium. The EU has exported 34 millions doses of vaccine- half its production total. The EU AZ contract was signs the day before the Uk on a ‘ best efforts to supply ‘ terms . The UK/ US have exported none - although entered into agreements to export vaccines. So this has lead to the EU requesting a cessation of vaccine exports- as there has been no quid pro quo. Is the UK in for a very harsh lesson? "We didn’t receive any vaccines from the EU. We received vaccines from Oxford and AstraZeneca, that were manufactured in a British (and several other European and non-European countries) funded factory based in Europe, during a time when it wasn’t approved in Europe. The EU don’t own the product made in the factories. AstraZeneca do. I repeat, the EU has not given us vaccines. | |||
"The AZ vaccine was researched and developed by Oxford University with UK government funding. The UK signed agreements with AZ and with Pfizer months ahead of the EU. The Pfizer vaccines are mainly but not entirely manufactured in Belgium. The AZ vaccines in many countries both within the EU and elsewhere (in UK and India for example). At the end of the day these are all COMMERCIAL contracts between companies, many of which are multi-national, and governments/health authorities etc. The problem with the EU was their insistence on centralising the procurement with their bureaucratic unelected commission who royally fucked everything up as usual. Member states realised this too late and then started to make their own arrangements...e.g. Poland sourcing unapproved vaccines from Russia and China. It is probably illegal for them (EU) to block shipments...but court cases to prove that could take years so would be pointless and the EU bully boys know that. #truecolours. See above the EU actually signed their contract before the UK, albeit a day. Source CNN- they asked for an FOI from the uk government on its contract with AZ. That’s why the EU published its contract with AZ in January- why do you think the UK government published their with redacted sections." Given that it’s a British government funded vaccine, developed by a British university, I don’t believe that we would have signed or negotiated our deal after the EU. Pascal Soirot has been on record stating that the EU took many months longer than most countries to reach a deal and fund the vaccine and production. | |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Really? Think this is quite incorrect." Then you would be wrong. The EU is a political entity. It does not manufacture vaccines. It’s independent companies that manufacture the vaccines and export them. I sell goods to people in the EU but I would say the the U.K. sold them or supplied them, it’s down to little old me. | |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Really? Think this is quite incorrect. Then you would be wrong. The EU is a political entity. It does not manufacture vaccines. It’s independent companies that manufacture the vaccines and export them. I sell goods to people in the EU but I would say the the U.K. sold them or supplied them, it’s down to little old me." Wouldn’t damn predictive text. | |||
"I think there's a lot of political posturing going on." I think the EU have been marvellous in all aspects and the UK are naughty naughty boys and at fault for all sides | |||
"Just wanting a broad opinion/ comments given the facts that the UK had received 9 million vaccines from the EU- which has no doubt saved lives. This has not been reciprocated by the UK. The US has not exported any of its vaccines either. Infact, Canada has been sourcing its vaccines from Belgium. The EU has exported 34 millions doses of vaccine- half its production total. The EU AZ contract was signs the day before the Uk on a ‘ best efforts to supply ‘ terms . The UK/ US have exported none - although entered into agreements to export vaccines. So this has lead to the EU requesting a cessation of vaccine exports- as there has been no quid pro quo. Is the UK in for a very harsh lesson? "The simple short answer is no. Or to quote Charles de Gaule, non!, non!, non!. I would add that the EU administration deserves all it gets. | |||
"The EU have not sent us any vaccines, it does not manufacture vaccines. Companies located in the EU have contracts to provide the U.K. with vaccines. Really? Think this is quite incorrect. Then you would be wrong. The EU is a political entity. It does not manufacture vaccines. It’s independent companies that manufacture the vaccines and export them. I sell goods to people in the EU but I would say the the U.K. sold them or supplied them, it’s down to little old me." You're right I misread your earlier comment. | |||
| |||
"It's not easy for some to say that the UK simply done a better job of securing vaccine for their population but that is the facts. Ordered earlier and seems done a better job on the contract. The EU have resorted to the 'don't you know who we are' attitude and trying to deflect blame. They would be better off putting their energy into doing a better job themselves " I think you're right. The UK have got plenty wrong through all this and I'm sure will still get more wrong. But I find it very disappointing to hear us brits finding any excuse they can to heap blame on us and praise the EU. In this particular instance the EU have fucked up and the UK did well so far. There's still plenty of things for the UK haters to moan about. But give us a break when we finally do some things well. As for the EU... We aren't in it any more... Like a husband being kicked out of his marital home.. We don't live there any more... Its time to move on. | |||
| |||
| |||
"And further to this, there's so much more to be gained by working together, you know? Like, for instance, did you know that the trials of the Oxford vaccine were made possible by a lab in Italy? The Oxford team produced tiny vials that are called seed stock. Those tiny vials were used near Rome to grow it into a couple of litres, enough to use for trials, and sent to the UK for trials there. The Rome lab also sent some to African countries for trials there, and Brazil was involved as well. Likewise the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. BioNTech is in Germany. It's a company founded by a husband and wife team who've both got Turkish backgrounds. The European Investment Bank gave BioNTech funding of 100m euros. The EIB is part of the EU. If it hadn't been for BioNTech, there wouldn't be a Pfizer vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. And BioNTech said that they had people from 60 different countries working on the project. It's so much better to cooperate, it's so much better to work together across borders. " So I ask the question again - how many vaccines - of it’s not for profit- has the UK exported to other countries? | |||
"And further to this, there's so much more to be gained by working together, you know? Like, for instance, did you know that the trials of the Oxford vaccine were made possible by a lab in Italy? The Oxford team produced tiny vials that are called seed stock. Those tiny vials were used near Rome to grow it into a couple of litres, enough to use for trials, and sent to the UK for trials there. The Rome lab also sent some to African countries for trials there, and Brazil was involved as well. Likewise the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. BioNTech is in Germany. It's a company founded by a husband and wife team who've both got Turkish backgrounds. The European Investment Bank gave BioNTech funding of 100m euros. The EIB is part of the EU. If it hadn't been for BioNTech, there wouldn't be a Pfizer vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. And BioNTech said that they had people from 60 different countries working on the project. It's so much better to cooperate, it's so much better to work together across borders. So I ask the question again - how many vaccines - of it’s not for profit- has the UK exported to other countries?" The U.K. isn’t responsible for exporting vaccines from AZ factories. That’s private decision by the company, dictated by contractual supply agreements.. The only entity responsible for that is AstraZeneca. The contracts are between that company and it’s clients (countries). There is no vaccine supply contract between the EU and other countries. There is no vaccine supply contract between the U.K. and other countries (other than our contribution to Covax). | |||
| |||
"Well apparently, Jon in Dorset, the UK hasn't yet exported any. All the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine, that's an EU product, developed in the EU, some of it exported to the UK. I'm supposed to be getting the vaccine first dose on Monday, and do you know what? I'd send it to someone in Latvia, or in Ukraine, or Russia, or Brazil, or Kenya, who needs it more. I would if I could. Because I don't need it that bad. I've already had the coronavirus and I didn't even know. I felt achey in January and I thought it was because I'd been jumping up and down in the garden. I volunteered for a study and they said, the sample you gave, it's positive. But then again, I do kinda need it, because I see a lot of old people, and I want to protect them? I've always gone and got the flu jab, in the past, not so much for me, but for them. Like, I try not to kill my customers, you know? " The Pfizer/Biontech vaccine isn’t an “EU product”. It’s a private companies product. The EU did not create the vaccine or even manufacture it. This is where all the confusion and politicising comes from. | |||
| |||
"Well apparently, Jon in Dorset, the UK hasn't yet exported any. All the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine, that's an EU product, developed in the EU, some of it exported to the UK. I'm supposed to be getting the vaccine first dose on Monday, and do you know what? I'd send it to someone in Latvia, or in Ukraine, or Russia, or Brazil, or Kenya, who needs it more. I would if I could. Because I don't need it that bad. I've already had the coronavirus and I didn't even know. I felt achey in January and I thought it was because I'd been jumping up and down in the garden. I volunteered for a study and they said, the sample you gave, it's positive. But then again, I do kinda need it, because I see a lot of old people, and I want to protect them? I've always gone and got the flu jab, in the past, not so much for me, but for them. Like, I try not to kill my customers, you know? " Pip, I am so sorry you got COVID and I would say to you or anybody- get vaccinated, any vaccine that’s offered. It’s absolute bastard of a disease and I would’nt it wish it on anyone. These vaccines are amazing , politics aside, just get vaccinated | |||
"And further to this, there's so much more to be gained by working together, you know? Like, for instance, did you know that the trials of the Oxford vaccine were made possible by a lab in Italy? The Oxford team produced tiny vials that are called seed stock. Those tiny vials were used near Rome to grow it into a couple of litres, enough to use for trials, and sent to the UK for trials there. The Rome lab also sent some to African countries for trials there, and Brazil was involved as well. Likewise the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. BioNTech is in Germany. It's a company founded by a husband and wife team who've both got Turkish backgrounds. The European Investment Bank gave BioNTech funding of 100m euros. The EIB is part of the EU. If it hadn't been for BioNTech, there wouldn't be a Pfizer vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. And BioNTech said that they had people from 60 different countries working on the project. It's so much better to cooperate, it's so much better to work together across borders. So I ask the question again - how many vaccines - of it’s not for profit- has the UK exported to other countries?" Didnt the UK on its own donate more money to the Covax programme (providing vaccines to 3rd world nations, countries that can't afford it, need extra support etc etc) than all of the 28 European countries put together? KJ | |||
"But the EU did fund the development of the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. At least in part. 100m euros. There's a European Commission press release about it. 100m euros in debt financing for vaccine development and manufacturing. And why is BioNTech in Germany? Because it's a good place to do it. The EU's science fund, Horizon, helps. Free movement, helps. EU rules on protection of personal data like as medical records, helps. And free movement is not a free for all as you will know when you look up EU directive 2004/38. " It's a German company but has branches in the U.S. too and ties with China. As others have said the EU have not exported vaccines, its private companies fulfilling contracts. | |||
"But the EU did fund the development of the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. At least in part. 100m euros. There's a European Commission press release about it. 100m euros in debt financing for vaccine development and manufacturing. And why is BioNTech in Germany? Because it's a good place to do it. The EU's science fund, Horizon, helps. Free movement, helps. EU rules on protection of personal data like as medical records, helps. And free movement is not a free for all as you will know when you look up EU directive 2004/38. " BioNTech is in Germany because the founders are German-Turkish. One of the founders was born in Germany to Turkish parents and the other came when he was 4 and is a German national. They set up the company in the land in which they live, not because of any special financial arrangements. BioNTech has been producing immunotherapy products for many years, it just so happens that one of their senior VPs is Katalin Karakó, inventer of the mRNA vaccine (she came up with the idea in the late 1980s). | |||
| |||
"Talking about BioNTech, yes it's a private company fulfilling contracts. Let's be accurate, here. Private companies in, say, Germany, operate within the legal framework of national law, and further, within the legal framework of EU law created by the countries coming together to form the European Union, according to the treaties signed by national leaders and approved by their parliaments or by referendum." As do all law abiding companies in all countries. Still means they are private and their achievements are theirs not the EU' s, UK's or anyone else's. | |||
| |||
"The companies' achievements are indeed theirs. But the companies don't operate in isolation. They work within the business environment that's been set up. That includes incentives, like the incentives to encourage work on rare diseases. These are called orphan medicinal products. The European Commission has a page on orphan medicinal products. And there is the Horizon science programme, the European Commission's Research*EU, and funding from the European Investment Bank that is one of the parts of the European Union." So pharma companies didn't exist or develop products before the EU and can't exist or develop products without the EU? | |||
"I think the EU deserve to be shown greater respect by us overall. I thought the UK contract was signed some time before the EU one but it's easy to be manipulated by the media, most of which is anti-EU. Are we watching the same media? I think it is quite clear that the EU mishandled their negotiations with the vaccine companies, they botched the subsequent roll out and their politicians then added to the woes by questioning the efficacy of certain vaccines to such an extent that they have now turned public opinion against a key solution their problem. That is not an anti EU media issue - I think that is a well accepted fact. " Your right, while this current UK government have been useless in combating the effects Covid their handling of the vaccine rollout has been excellent. They ordered millions of vaccines very early even when the vaccine testing was at a very early stage. The overly beurocratic EU have made a hash of it and their continued criticism of the AstraZenica vaccine is not doing them any favours. They need to get their act together as it is in Britain's favour that all countries have a successful vaccination programme. It is only then that life will get back to normal | |||
"The AZ vaccine was researched and developed by Oxford University with UK government funding. The UK signed agreements with AZ and with Pfizer months ahead of the EU. The Pfizer vaccines are mainly but not entirely manufactured in Belgium. The AZ vaccines in many countries both within the EU and elsewhere (in UK and India for example). At the end of the day these are all COMMERCIAL contracts between companies, many of which are multi-national, and governments/health authorities etc. The problem with the EU was their insistence on centralising the procurement with their bureaucratic unelected commission who royally fucked everything up as usual. Member states realised this too late and then started to make their own arrangements...e.g. Poland sourcing unapproved vaccines from Russia and China. It is probably illegal for them (EU) to block shipments...but court cases to prove that could take years so would be pointless and the EU bully boys know that. #truecolours. See above the EU actually signed their contract before the UK, albeit a day. Source CNN- they asked for an FOI from the uk government on its contract with AZ. That’s why the EU published its contract with AZ in January- why do you think the UK government published their with redacted sections." UK sign off = June 2020 EU sign off = August 2020 Source CNN I think you are getting a little confused The EU ordered later so simply get them supplied later and agreed contract as best as he company can provide..... | |||
"And further to this, there's so much more to be gained by working together, you know? Like, for instance, did you know that the trials of the Oxford vaccine were made possible by a lab in Italy? The Oxford team produced tiny vials that are called seed stock. Those tiny vials were used near Rome to grow it into a couple of litres, enough to use for trials, and sent to the UK for trials there. The Rome lab also sent some to African countries for trials there, and Brazil was involved as well. Likewise the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. BioNTech is in Germany. It's a company founded by a husband and wife team who've both got Turkish backgrounds. The European Investment Bank gave BioNTech funding of 100m euros. The EIB is part of the EU. If it hadn't been for BioNTech, there wouldn't be a Pfizer vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. And BioNTech said that they had people from 60 different countries working on the project. It's so much better to cooperate, it's so much better to work together across borders. So I ask the question again - how many vaccines - of it’s not for profit- has the UK exported to other countries?" The company is exporting millions. Its companies not countries who have developed and exporting vaccines  | |||
| |||
"Just wanting a broad opinion/ comments given the facts that the UK had received 9 million vaccines from the EU- which has no doubt saved lives. This has not been reciprocated by the UK. The US has not exported any of its vaccines either. Infact, Canada has been sourcing its vaccines from Belgium. The EU has exported 34 millions doses of vaccine- half its production total. The EU AZ contract was signs the day before the Uk on a ‘ best efforts to supply ‘ terms . The UK/ US have exported none - although entered into agreements to export vaccines. So this has lead to the EU requesting a cessation of vaccine exports- as there has been no quid pro quo. Is the UK in for a very harsh lesson? "It's my opinion that your facts are wrong. M | |||
"The companies' achievements are indeed theirs. But the companies don't operate in isolation. They work within the business environment that's been set up. That includes incentives, like the incentives to encourage work on rare diseases. These are called orphan medicinal products. The European Commission has a page on orphan medicinal products. And there is the Horizon science programme, the European Commission's Research*EU, and funding from the European Investment Bank that is one of the parts of the European Union." If I read between the lines, I think you’re implying that because a business follows local laws and takes advantage of funding (as do all companies in all countries) then that means the government can claim ownership of those companies, their achievements and even worse - control who they manufacture and sell things to ? That’s a very scary ideology. Eerily similar to how China, North Korea and Russia operate. | |||
| |||
"Pascal Soriot, the French CEO of AZ, has stated that the UK ordered its vaccine 3 months ahead of the EU. You conveniently ignore the fact that Macron bullied the EU into betting its house on the 300m jab order with Sanofi, which ultimately could not develop a vaccine. You also ignore the fact that in Europe some of the key delivery agents used are manufactured only in the UK. What the EU is now talking about is on effect the nationalisation of the vaccine pharma industry. Never mind the fact that a number of EU countries has made commercially damaging and defamatory statements about the efficacy of the AZ jab. And never mind the fact that AZ is delivering vaccine at cost while Pfizer-Biontech is charging 10 times as much. All this according to the Telegraph has started scaring off all manner of overseas companies from investing in the EU resulting in huge capital outflows from the EU in November and December. " The EU will discuss possibly implementing Article 122 this week. This allows them to effectively take control of the pharma companies on EU soil. | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine" However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol" . Google search CNN EU UK AZ vaccine contracts and have a read | |||
"The companies' achievements are indeed theirs. But the companies don't operate in isolation. They work within the business environment that's been set up. That includes incentives, like the incentives to encourage work on rare diseases. These are called orphan medicinal products. The European Commission has a page on orphan medicinal products. And there is the Horizon science programme, the European Commission's Research*EU, and funding from the European Investment Bank that is one of the parts of the European Union. If I read between the lines, I think you’re implying that because a business follows local laws and takes advantage of funding (as do all companies in all countries) then that means the government can claim ownership of those companies, their achievements and even worse - control who they manufacture and sell things to ? That’s a very scary ideology. Eerily similar to how China, North Korea and Russia operate." The UK government did block GSK partnering with Oxford initially | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol. Google search CNN EU UK AZ vaccine contracts and have a read" However payments and agreements were made in June e.g. 3 months before any agreement with the EU. The EU dithered and wilted under their usual bureaucratic nonsense | |||
| |||
| |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol" The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it  | |||
"Indeed . The UK agreement with AstraZeneca took place in May 2020 (The EU was in August) The UK government making a payment of £65M for AstraZeneca to enable the production " Yup an agreement was made months before contract signed | |||
"Well apparently, Jon in Dorset, the UK hasn't yet exported any. All the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine, that's an EU product, developed in the EU, some of it exported to the UK. I'm supposed to be getting the vaccine first dose on Monday, and do you know what? I'd send it to someone in Latvia, or in Ukraine, or Russia, or Brazil, or Kenya, who needs it more. I would if I could. Because I don't need it that bad. I've already had the coronavirus and I didn't even know. I felt achey in January and I thought it was because I'd been jumping up and down in the garden. I volunteered for a study and they said, the sample you gave, it's positive. But then again, I do kinda need it, because I see a lot of old people, and I want to protect them? I've always gone and got the flu jab, in the past, not so much for me, but for them. Like, I try not to kill my customers, you know? Pip, I am so sorry you got COVID and I would say to you or anybody- get vaccinated, any vaccine that’s offered. It’s absolute bastard of a disease and I would’nt it wish it on anyone. These vaccines are amazing , politics aside, just get vaccinated " well said then we can get back to living as normal as possible | |||
| |||
"Pascal Soriot, the French CEO of AZ, has stated that the UK ordered its vaccine 3 months ahead of the EU. You conveniently ignore the fact that Macron bullied the EU into betting its house on the 300m jab order with Sanofi, which ultimately could not develop a vaccine. You also ignore the fact that in Europe some of the key delivery agents used are manufactured only in the UK. What the EU is now talking about is on effect the nationalisation of the vaccine pharma industry. Never mind the fact that a number of EU countries has made commercially damaging and defamatory statements about the efficacy of the AZ jab. And never mind the fact that AZ is delivering vaccine at cost while Pfizer-Biontech is charging 10 times as much. All this according to the Telegraph has started scaring off all manner of overseas companies from investing in the EU resulting in huge capital outflows from the EU in November and December. " That's very interesting... Not surprising... I think we have an opportunity to be the "good guys" and bail out the EUs bungled vaccine contracts. We will still be better with a good relationship with the French and Germans... Who run the EU. | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine" And therefore... Through diligent planning.. The EU see fit to bastardise the UK for getting something right. What a fucked up organisation they are. They should be truly ashamed of their leader. | |||
"But the EU did fund the development of the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. At least in part. 100m euros. There's a European Commission press release about it. 100m euros in debt financing for vaccine development and manufacturing. And why is BioNTech in Germany? Because it's a good place to do it. The EU's science fund, Horizon, helps. Free movement, helps. EU rules on protection of personal data like as medical records, helps. And free movement is not a free for all as you will know when you look up EU directive 2004/38. It's a German company but has branches in the U.S. too and ties with China. As others have said the EU have not exported vaccines, its private companies fulfilling contracts." Maybe the confusion has germinated because the EU started interference with the supply chain and expected companies to comply as if they had some form of control. Just a thought. | |||
"Pascal Soriot, the French CEO of AZ, has stated that the UK ordered its vaccine 3 months ahead of the EU. You conveniently ignore the fact that Macron bullied the EU into betting its house on the 300m jab order with Sanofi, which ultimately could not develop a vaccine. You also ignore the fact that in Europe some of the key delivery agents used are manufactured only in the UK. What the EU is now talking about is on effect the nationalisation of the vaccine pharma industry. Never mind the fact that a number of EU countries has made commercially damaging and defamatory statements about the efficacy of the AZ jab. And never mind the fact that AZ is delivering vaccine at cost while Pfizer-Biontech is charging 10 times as much. All this according to the Telegraph has started scaring off all manner of overseas companies from investing in the EU resulting in huge capital outflows from the EU in November and December. The EU will discuss possibly implementing Article 122 this week. This allows them to effectively take control of the pharma companies on EU soil. " If this is true and they do then my reasons for voting Brexit are realised even more bluntly than I imagined. | |||
"But the EU did fund the development of the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. At least in part. 100m euros. There's a European Commission press release about it. 100m euros in debt financing for vaccine development and manufacturing. And why is BioNTech in Germany? Because it's a good place to do it. The EU's science fund, Horizon, helps. Free movement, helps. EU rules on protection of personal data like as medical records, helps. And free movement is not a free for all as you will know when you look up EU directive 2004/38. It's a German company but has branches in the U.S. too and ties with China. As others have said the EU have not exported vaccines, its private companies fulfilling contracts. Maybe the confusion has germinated because the EU started interference with the supply chain and expected companies to comply as if they had some form of control. Just a thought." Wasn't the whole premise of the EU that governments were forbidden from providing financial support to nor getting involved with running of companies in their Borders? Sounds very much like a lot of interfering going on... And in times of need perhaps it may be necessary but still not right. | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it "The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ? | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol" I think some people are mis reading things ...... The UK agreement was months before . To state when some contracts were signed is misleading as the original UK agreement was in May /June it made all the news as we paid 65m at 5hatvstage force vaccine that didnt exist at that point. Risky but it paid off big time ! #dontmislead about false arbitrary other dates # | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?"Exactly, the one day thing is totally irrelevant if the original agreement was months before. The EU withered and argued as they still are now #well out of EU fiasco | |||
| |||
| |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol I think some people are mis reading things ...... The UK agreement was months before . To state when some contracts were signed is misleading as the original UK agreement was in May /June it made all the news as we paid 65m at 5hatvstage force vaccine that didnt exist at that point. Risky but it paid off big time ! #dontmislead about false arbitrary other dates #" It's intended to be misleading in an attempt to hide the facts the EU messed up. Bit like trying to claim its an EU vaccine | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol I think some people are mis reading things ...... The UK agreement was months before . To state when some contracts were signed is misleading as the original UK agreement was in May /June it made all the news as we paid 65m at 5hatvstage force vaccine that didnt exist at that point. Risky but it paid off big time ! #dontmislead about false arbitrary other dates # It's intended to be misleading in an attempt to hide the facts the EU messed up. Bit like trying to claim its an EU vaccine" Exactly, someone is muddling the waters with these dates when it's well published that the UK agreement was 3 months prior to the EU. In addition even when the EU agreement was made the EU failed to make the agreed payments | |||
| |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine And therefore... Through diligent planning.. The EU see fit to bastardise the UK for getting something right. What a fucked up organisation they are. They should be truly ashamed of their leader. "
I voted to stay but seeing their incompetence and downright false information they are spouting we are well rid | |||
| |||
| |||
"The EU signed before the UK , but the UK approved the vaccine months before the EU and so were supplied first by the manufacturer , it's the EU's own fault that it took so long to pass the vaccine S.ireland has only started to give it's people the vaccine and are months behind the UK" Incorrect . The EU did not sign before the UKs initial contract. That was a subsequent contract the UK had signed | |||
| |||
"Pascal Soriot, the French CEO of AZ, has stated that the UK ordered its vaccine 3 months ahead of the EU. You conveniently ignore the fact that Macron bullied the EU into betting its house on the 300m jab order with Sanofi, which ultimately could not develop a vaccine. You also ignore the fact that in Europe some of the key delivery agents used are manufactured only in the UK. What the EU is now talking about is on effect the nationalisation of the vaccine pharma industry. Never mind the fact that a number of EU countries has made commercially damaging and defamatory statements about the efficacy of the AZ jab. And never mind the fact that AZ is delivering vaccine at cost while Pfizer-Biontech is charging 10 times as much. All this according to the Telegraph has started scaring off all manner of overseas companies from investing in the EU resulting in huge capital outflows from the EU in November and December. " | |||
| |||
"It's a quasi vaccine, pseudo vaccine, not safe... not for over 65s..... If trump had said what macron has....."
Yes they have done everything possible not to use the damned thing then have the cheek to complain they haven't enough!! | |||
| |||
 | |||
"Last week in the EU, regarding the AZ vaccine. EMA... "vaccine is safe to use" Belguim... "we are not giving it to the over 55s" France...."we are only giving it to the over 55s" Mixed messages like that will probably cost lives. " It's a good job it was centralised to have one European wide vaccine strategy | |||
 | |||
| |||
"Every EU country can authorise an emergency medicine straight away. It's not compulsory to wait for the EMA. That means that everything the UK has done, it could have done as an EU member." Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. | |||
"Every EU country can authorise an emergency medicine straight away. It's not compulsory to wait for the EMA. That means that everything the UK has done, it could have done as an EU member. Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. " Some did. Hungary and I think at least one other bought Russian Sputnik vaccines. | |||
"Every EU country can authorise an emergency medicine straight away. It's not compulsory to wait for the EMA. That means that everything the UK has done, it could have done as an EU member. Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. Some did. Hungary and I think at least one other bought Russian Sputnik vaccines. " That's one then. And one other with no name | |||
"Every EU country can authorise an emergency medicine straight away. It's not compulsory to wait for the EMA. That means that everything the UK has done, it could have done as an EU member. Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. Some did. Hungary and I think at least one other bought Russian Sputnik vaccines. That's one then. And one other with no name" Hungary, Slovakia bought it. Czech Republic probably going to. I couldn't be arsed to Google it earlier. Some countries have chosen or are choosing to do their own thing. Yes, a small number thus far, but some. Just sharing facts, not venturing an opinion | |||
 | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?"I'm not missing any point, I'm just stating facts | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?
I'm not missing any point, I'm just stating facts"But you are mis understanding the facts and mis quoting as the EU signed their agreement 3 months after the UK . You have missed the point . | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?
I'm not missing any point, I'm just stating facts"Think of the order of events 1. Say if you signed a contract to purchase something and had to wait 6 months for delivery. 2. 3 months later your neighbour agreed to purchase the same. 3. Then you then decided to order more . Would you then say your neighbour's ordered first ? Your logic is misguided | |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?
I'm not missing any point, I'm just stating facts
Think of the order of events
1. Say if you signed a contract to purchase something and had to wait 6 months for delivery.
2. 3 months later your neighbour agreed to purchase the same.
3. Then you then decided to order more .
Would you then say your neighbour's ordered first ? Your logic is misguided "
Thank you yes the logic of some people unfortunately is sadly lacking . | |||
"Every EU country can authorise an emergency medicine straight away. It's not compulsory to wait for the EMA. That means that everything the UK has done, it could have done as an EU member. Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. Some did. Hungary and I think at least one other bought Russian Sputnik vaccines. That's one then. And one other with no name Hungary, Slovakia bought it. Czech Republic probably going to. I couldn't be arsed to Google it earlier. Some countries have chosen or are choosing to do their own thing. Yes, a small number thus far, but some. Just sharing facts, not venturing an opinion "Interesting.. Czech currently with the highest per 100k deaths so can easily understand how they can be doing anything to reduce those numbers. Mistakes happen but wonder why 12 months into this EU are still on the face of it backing their central vaccine strategy. Clearly vaccine nationalism is happening and it was always going to happen with such an imbalance in supply and demand and control resting with a handful of the wealthiest nations. Once blockades start happening that's only going to make for tit for tat and make the matter a lot worse. AZ will regret doing this at cost for philanthropic reasons. If it costs nothing people don't value it. | |||
| |||
"Makes you wonder why none of the remaining EU countries did that whilst waiting for vaccines to be approved slowly by the ema and procured even more slowly. " Well, backformore, the EMA has actually been quick. The EMA has given early approval without all the evidence usually needed. Last year there was a scramble for PPE. So all the rest of Europe said, you know, that was bad, let's not do that again on buying vaccines, let's do it in a better way this time...? | |||
| |||
"The Pfizer vaccine made in Germany cannot be made without a component made in and supplied by the UK" It's the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. Without BioNTech there wouldn't be that vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. Source for the claim that EU manufacturing depends on a part from the UK? I find it doubtful. It's doubtful because that's what EU anti-dumping rules are for. It's in the interest of the members to make sure that there is always a supplier of something somewhere inside at least one of the member countries, as much as possible. Where there is only a single supplier in the Union then EU anti-dumping rules protect that supplier against imports from outside. As a member the UK benefited from anti-dumping rules. | |||
| |||
"The Pfizer vaccine made in Germany cannot be made without a component made in and supplied by the UK It's the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. Without BioNTech there wouldn't be that vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. Source for the claim that EU manufacturing depends on a part from the UK? I find it doubtful. It's doubtful because that's what EU anti-dumping rules are for. It's in the interest of the members to make sure that there is always a supplier of something somewhere inside at least one of the member countries, as much as possible. Where there is only a single supplier in the Union then EU anti-dumping rules protect that supplier against imports from outside. As a member the UK benefited from anti-dumping rules." On the news yesterday they said the Pfizer vaccine has 58 separate components that are supplied by 19 countries many of which are outside the EU. | |||
"The Pfizer vaccine made in Germany cannot be made without a component made in and supplied by the UK It's the BioNTech / Pfizer vaccine. Without BioNTech there wouldn't be that vaccine. Or it would have taken longer. Source for the claim that EU manufacturing depends on a part from the UK? I find it doubtful. It's doubtful because that's what EU anti-dumping rules are for. It's in the interest of the members to make sure that there is always a supplier of something somewhere inside at least one of the member countries, as much as possible. Where there is only a single supplier in the Union then EU anti-dumping rules protect that supplier against imports from outside. As a member the UK benefited from anti-dumping rules. On the news yesterday they said the Pfizer vaccine has 58 separate components that are supplied by 19 countries many of which are outside the EU. " Doubtful perhaps... But true neverthe less.... See this link and extract from it... https://news.sky.com/story/amp/covid-19-what-impact-would-an-eu-export-ban-have-on-the-uks-vaccine-programme-12253761 Where are they made? Manufacturing the Pfizer vaccine, a new technology, is complex. It requires processes in the US before raw materials are transferred to Europe, where the final steps are completed at the company's facility in Puurs, Belgium. Following an overhaul in February, Pfizer has upgraded its global production forecast for 2021 from 1.3bn to 2.3bn doses. There is no production in the UK but one of the key components - the lipids used in the vaccine - are manufactured by British chemicals giant Croda here and in the US. The AZ vaccine is manufactured under contract in the UK, Europe, India and the United States. UK production takes place at two plants, Oxford Biomedica in Oxford and Cobra Biologics in Keele, with 'fill-and-finish' taking place in Wrexham at a plant owned by Wockhardt. There are also two sites in Europe: Thermo Fisher Scientific in Seneffe, Belgium, and Halix in Leiden in the Netherlands. The Halix plant is at the centre of the political tension between Brussels and London, but is still awaiting approval by the European Medicines Agency. | |||
| |||
"If we are to believe the link given earlier the EU did indeed sign a contract 1 day before UK but and I quote; "the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said." It would seem the UK had much more forethought in the whole supply chain as well as delivery of the vaccine However the EU didnt sign any agreement before the UK it was false info by the guy who posted it. Guessing someone not got over Brexit yet lol The EU did sign a contract 1 day before the UK it's out there in the public domain, go find it
The uK agreement was 3 months previously though, I think you are missing the vital point ?
I'm not missing any point, I'm just stating facts
Think of the order of events
1. Say if you signed a contract to purchase something and had to wait 6 months for delivery.
2. 3 months later your neighbour agreed to purchase the same.
3. Then you then decided to order more .
Would you then say your neighbour's ordered first ? Your logic is misguided " | |||
| |||
"What a complete and utter mess the EU has made of this , it just confirms a lot of reasons of why we pulled out and wanted nothing to do with this overly bureaucratic community "Yep that crystal ball came in particularly handy. | |||
"This is a little more background info... The final paragraph is illuminating... "The issue highlighted by EU officials in recent days is that AstraZeneca has a plant in the Netherlands’ Leiden Bio Science Park, producing vaccines. The plant, run by the subcontractor Halix, has not exported any jabs to the EU as yet as the facility is yet to be given approval by the European Medicines Agency. Neither has it exported a significant number of completed doses to the UK. No exports have been made to the UK in the last two months and if any were sent before that they were only samples or doses for use in clinical trials. AstraZeneca’s production for the UK market is largely covered by production in Oxford and Staffordshire, with input also expected from a manufacturing partner in India in the event of yields in Britain being lower than expected. But the Dutch plant is building up something of a stockpile now – and both the EU and the UK want them. More to the point the both believe they have a claim to them. The UK’s early financing of Oxford University’s efforts, and its tie-up with the Anglo-Swedish pharma giant AstraZeneca, gave the government the opportunity to stipulate that UK requirements should be prioritised by the company if a successful vaccine emerged. But a lower-than-expected yield in the UK plants in recent weeks, and a stalling of production at the Serum Institute of India Ltd, has left the British government wanting. It expects doses made in the Netherlands to come its way, a scenario that Brussels is understandably not at all happy with given the shortfalls it has suffered on expected AstraZeneca’s deliveries and the company’s refusal to divert doses in the UK to the EU. Under the EU’s export authorisation mechanism, brought into force at the end of January, the European commission has the power to block a request by a company to send doses out of the bloc. The Dutch government is not one to stand in the way of exports but it is ultimately up to Brussels. While no export request has been made as yet, EU officials have suggested that there is little chance of such an export being granted by the commission, especially given that the EMA is expected to give the Dutch plant its approval to make doses for the EU within days. The optics of doses leaving the EU for Britain when its own vaccination programme is only slowly gearing up are not good. This, then, has all the appearances of a zero-sum game. But the Dutch government is pushing for a little less aggravation and a little more negotiation – and with the UK now in the envious position of having vaccinated half the population, the UK has an opportunity to be a less self-congratulatory and tad more magnanimous. On Sunday, the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, gave more than a hint that initially doses made in the Netherlands and then the UK could be shared, and that joint investment in scaling up production was on the cards. “We could absolutely work together to continue to maximise production,” he told The Andrew Marr show. “We’re exploring where else we can grow the supply chain, whether at home or abroad.” The truth is that neither the UK nor the EU are in desperate need of more jabs. The EU is expecting approximately 300m doses in the second quarter of this year, and 55m of those will be from Johnson & Johnson, whose product requires only a single shot to be fully effective." I think you are right regarding supply - there are a lot of vaccines coming on line shortly. AZ are unfortunately not transparent in some of their actions with the EU and they are in trouble again over in the US for not disclosing all up to date trial data. Reputation is critical to vaccine compliance and AZ’s ( especially after what’s happened in the US) actions are not helpful. | |||
"This is a little more background info... The final paragraph is illuminating... "The issue highlighted by EU officials in recent days is that AstraZeneca has a plant in the Netherlands’ Leiden Bio Science Park, producing vaccines. The plant, run by the subcontractor Halix, has not exported any jabs to the EU as yet as the facility is yet to be given approval by the European Medicines Agency. Neither has it exported a significant number of completed doses to the UK. No exports have been made to the UK in the last two months and if any were sent before that they were only samples or doses for use in clinical trials. AstraZeneca’s production for the UK market is largely covered by production in Oxford and Staffordshire, with input also expected from a manufacturing partner in India in the event of yields in Britain being lower than expected. But the Dutch plant is building up something of a stockpile now – and both the EU and the UK want them. More to the point the both believe they have a claim to them. The UK’s early financing of Oxford University’s efforts, and its tie-up with the Anglo-Swedish pharma giant AstraZeneca, gave the government the opportunity to stipulate that UK requirements should be prioritised by the company if a successful vaccine emerged. But a lower-than-expected yield in the UK plants in recent weeks, and a stalling of production at the Serum Institute of India Ltd, has left the British government wanting. It expects doses made in the Netherlands to come its way, a scenario that Brussels is understandably not at all happy with given the shortfalls it has suffered on expected AstraZeneca’s deliveries and the company’s refusal to divert doses in the UK to the EU. Under the EU’s export authorisation mechanism, brought into force at the end of January, the European commission has the power to block a request by a company to send doses out of the bloc. The Dutch government is not one to stand in the way of exports but it is ultimately up to Brussels. While no export request has been made as yet, EU officials have suggested that there is little chance of such an export being granted by the commission, especially given that the EMA is expected to give the Dutch plant its approval to make doses for the EU within days. The optics of doses leaving the EU for Britain when its own vaccination programme is only slowly gearing up are not good. This, then, has all the appearances of a zero-sum game. But the Dutch government is pushing for a little less aggravation and a little more negotiation – and with the UK now in the envious position of having vaccinated half the population, the UK has an opportunity to be a less self-congratulatory and tad more magnanimous. On Sunday, the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, gave more than a hint that initially doses made in the Netherlands and then the UK could be shared, and that joint investment in scaling up production was on the cards. “We could absolutely work together to continue to maximise production,” he told The Andrew Marr show. “We’re exploring where else we can grow the supply chain, whether at home or abroad.” The truth is that neither the UK nor the EU are in desperate need of more jabs. The EU is expecting approximately 300m doses in the second quarter of this year, and 55m of those will be from Johnson & Johnson, whose product requires only a single shot to be fully effective. I think you are right regarding supply - there are a lot of vaccines coming on line shortly. AZ are unfortunately not transparent in some of their actions with the EU and they are in trouble again over in the US for not disclosing all up to date trial data. Reputation is critical to vaccine compliance and AZ’s ( especially after what’s happened in the US) actions are not helpful." The USA, litigation capitol of the world. Someone in the States starts a legal action. The world is surprisingly surprised. The country responsible for the "Do not put live animals in the microwave" and "this product may contain nuts" on a bag of peanuts. In summary, no one should be surprised at a legal action against anyone or anything in the States. M | |||
"This is a little more background info... The final paragraph is illuminating... "The issue highlighted by EU officials in recent days is that AstraZeneca has a plant in the Netherlands’ Leiden Bio Science Park, producing vaccines. The plant, run by the subcontractor Halix, has not exported any jabs to the EU as yet as the facility is yet to be given approval by the European Medicines Agency. Neither has it exported a significant number of completed doses to the UK. No exports have been made to the UK in the last two months and if any were sent before that they were only samples or doses for use in clinical trials. AstraZeneca’s production for the UK market is largely covered by production in Oxford and Staffordshire, with input also expected from a manufacturing partner in India in the event of yields in Britain being lower than expected. But the Dutch plant is building up something of a stockpile now – and both the EU and the UK want them. More to the point the both believe they have a claim to them. The UK’s early financing of Oxford University’s efforts, and its tie-up with the Anglo-Swedish pharma giant AstraZeneca, gave the government the opportunity to stipulate that UK requirements should be prioritised by the company if a successful vaccine emerged. But a lower-than-expected yield in the UK plants in recent weeks, and a stalling of production at the Serum Institute of India Ltd, has left the British government wanting. It expects doses made in the Netherlands to come its way, a scenario that Brussels is understandably not at all happy with given the shortfalls it has suffered on expected AstraZeneca’s deliveries and the company’s refusal to divert doses in the UK to the EU. Under the EU’s export authorisation mechanism, brought into force at the end of January, the European commission has the power to block a request by a company to send doses out of the bloc. The Dutch government is not one to stand in the way of exports but it is ultimately up to Brussels. While no export request has been made as yet, EU officials have suggested that there is little chance of such an export being granted by the commission, especially given that the EMA is expected to give the Dutch plant its approval to make doses for the EU within days. The optics of doses leaving the EU for Britain when its own vaccination programme is only slowly gearing up are not good. This, then, has all the appearances of a zero-sum game. But the Dutch government is pushing for a little less aggravation and a little more negotiation – and with the UK now in the envious position of having vaccinated half the population, the UK has an opportunity to be a less self-congratulatory and tad more magnanimous. On Sunday, the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, gave more than a hint that initially doses made in the Netherlands and then the UK could be shared, and that joint investment in scaling up production was on the cards. “We could absolutely work together to continue to maximise production,” he told The Andrew Marr show. “We’re exploring where else we can grow the supply chain, whether at home or abroad.” The truth is that neither the UK nor the EU are in desperate need of more jabs. The EU is expecting approximately 300m doses in the second quarter of this year, and 55m of those will be from Johnson & Johnson, whose product requires only a single shot to be fully effective. I think you are right regarding supply - there are a lot of vaccines coming on line shortly. AZ are unfortunately not transparent in some of their actions with the EU and they are in trouble again over in the US for not disclosing all up to date trial data. Reputation is critical to vaccine compliance and AZ’s ( especially after what’s happened in the US) actions are not helpful. The USA, litigation capitol of the world. Someone in the States starts a legal action. The world is surprisingly surprised. The country responsible for the "Do not put live animals in the microwave" and "this product may contain nuts" on a bag of peanuts. In summary, no one should be surprised at a legal action against anyone or anything in the States. M" Remember trump trying to get a german vaccine that would only be used in America? | |||
| |||
"It makes no odds who exported where. Tomorrow some UK vaccination centres will be shut for lack of vaccine, whilst the EU has stockpiles of the AZ vaccine. This clearly indicates that even if we exported to them it would be stockpiled, and take an age to end up in arms. The EU needs to get its crap in one sock and start putting it into its citizens, then worry about supplies and where they will come from. Yet again the EU is just making itself a laughing stock. If so far they have been under supplied and still not used what stock they have, it makes them look stupid - had they been supplied fully they would be awash with vaccine. " There is little argument that they have handled it badly from day 1. | |||
"It makes no odds who exported where. Tomorrow some UK vaccination centres will be shut for lack of vaccine, whilst the EU has stockpiles of the AZ vaccine. This clearly indicates that even if we exported to them it would be stockpiled, and take an age to end up in arms. The EU needs to get its crap in one sock and start putting it into its citizens, then worry about supplies and where they will come from. Yet again the EU is just making itself a laughing stock. If so far they have been under supplied and still not used what stock they have, it makes them look stupid - had they been supplied fully they would be awash with vaccine. " The world is watching their antics. If they are not careful this will come back to bite them | |||
"It makes no odds who exported where. Tomorrow some UK vaccination centres will be shut for lack of vaccine, whilst the EU has stockpiles of the AZ vaccine. This clearly indicates that even if we exported to them it would be stockpiled, and take an age to end up in arms. The EU needs to get its crap in one sock and start putting it into its citizens, then worry about supplies and where they will come from. Yet again the EU is just making itself a laughing stock. If so far they have been under supplied and still not used what stock they have, it makes them look stupid - had they been supplied fully they would be awash with vaccine. There is little argument that they have handled it badly from day 1." They have... We need to be careful with the finger pointing though. We are all a long way from home with this and a summer of madness will put us back where we were at the start. Plus we haven't even talked about booster shots yet. What would be good (and would leave us with no wriggle room) would be if they said... 'you know what... We fucked up and we are asking you for some help in making it right'. Equally we could say... "we've been doing well so far, can we help you out in a small way...after we have finished our priority groups" "and by the way can we sell our shelf fish"... Dream on... | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
