Well not if the EU have anything to do with them :lol: I am a huge fan of the EU but this is where they can really let themselves down.

The problem is with the suppliers rather than the EU.

The problem is with the suppliers rather than the EU.

 

Even so, they threatened to prevent export of the Pfizer vaccine due to low production and now are demanding UK factories make up the shortfall of EU factories making the Astrazeneca/Oxford vaccine. Whilst this is likely going to be framed as UK vs EU, it'll also have negative consequences for other countries who have ordered vaccine doses which don't have a manufacturing base for the vaccines.

Edited January 27, 20214 yr by Envoirment

The problem is with the suppliers rather than the EU.

 

They over promised and under delivered and it will be the same for the UK. I am a huge fan of the EU but I can't help but feel this is also politics. If they had concrete proof they would be calling their lawyers, not press conferences. The EC are doing it publiclly because they want to see the UK contract, which I think is not needed and also to protect the Bloc mentality. The problem lies in that they went as a Bloc and were slow to sign deals. There are loads of reports out there that the EC dithered and made the same orders that Italy, Germany, & Netherlands made after the UK purchase.. just 2 months later rather than a few days later.

 

There very well might be technical issues, but having it all play out for everyone to see is not what anyone needs. And the vaccine hasn't even been approved for use in the EU yet!

What the EU expect is that companies keep to their contractual agreements that the EU paid for handsomely in advance to help finance the development of the vaccine. They just want their fair share of what is being produced. Ie they want the UK to stop playing vaccine nationalism with the AZ jag or the EU will slow down supplies of the good ones to rebalance the availability so that overall, the EU is getting it’s fair share of the available jags. The UK supply is miraculously unimpaired by this supply issue and AZ can’t give the EU a straight answer to the question of „ok, if you’ve issues why isn’t the UKs delivery impacted too?“. So is it really that surprising that they’re suspicious of the intentions of the UK Gov and AZ.

 

 

And as we all know when this Gov says „don’t do X“ it’s because it’s deflecting from the fact that it’s doing X. Today the UK gov said the EU shouldn’t „play vaccine nationalism“. :thinking: (obvi no criticism of Russia and China who are explicitly playing vaccine nationalism and are shouting it on their propaganda networks in multiple languages)

They over promised and under delivered and it will be the same for the UK. I am a huge fan of the EU but I can't help but feel this is also politics. If they had concrete proof they would be calling their lawyers, not press conferences. The EC are doing it publiclly because they want to see the UK contract, which I think is not needed and also to protect the Bloc mentality. The problem lies in that they went as a Bloc and were slow to sign deals. There are loads of reports out there that the EC dithered and made the same orders that Italy, Germany, & Netherlands made after the UK purchase.. just 2 months later rather than a few days later.

 

There very well might be technical issues, but having it all play out for everyone to see is not what anyone needs. And the vaccine hasn't even been approved for use in the EU yet!

AstraZeneca committed to a contract and they are failing to deliver on it.

I would say the riots at the weekend have caused this emotional response from the EU as well.

What the EU expect is that companies keep to their contractual agreements that the EU paid for handsomely in advance to help finance the development of the vaccine. They just want their fair share of what is being produced. Ie they want the UK to stop playing vaccine nationalism with the AZ jag or the EU will slow down supplies of the good ones to rebalance the availability so that overall, the EU is getting it’s fair share of the available jags. The UK supply is miraculously unimpaired by this supply issue and AZ can’t give the EU a straight answer to the question of „ok, if you’ve issues why isn’t the UKs delivery impacted too?“. So is it really that surprising that they’re suspicious of the intentions of the UK Gov and AZ.

And as we all know when this Gov says „don’t do X“ it’s because it’s deflecting from the fact that it’s doing X. Today the UK gov said the EU shouldn’t „play vaccine nationalism“. :thinking: (obvi no criticism of Russia and China who are explicitly playing vaccine nationalism and are shouting it on their propaganda networks in multiple languages)

 

Which is all very well but the issue is between AZ and EC. Threatning to block the Pfizer vaccine to the UK for example is not on. The Pfizer and AZ under delivered for the first batches too. We didn't throw any of the manufacturers under a bus or threaten to take someone else's vaccine. Like I said before, if AZ have broken any sort of contractual obligation the EC should be gearing up their lawyers and not having a public row. They're making a tit of themselves over a vaccine they have not even approved.

 

 

If the EU win the case against AstraZeneca does that mean the vaccine rollout will be a lot slower in the UK?

What the EU expect is that companies keep to their contractual agreements that the EU paid for handsomely in advance to help finance the development of the vaccine. They just want their fair share of what is being produced. Ie they want the UK to stop playing vaccine nationalism with the AZ jag or the EU will slow down supplies of the good ones to rebalance the availability so that overall, the EU is getting it’s fair share of the available jags. The UK supply is miraculously unimpaired by this supply issue and AZ can’t give the EU a straight answer to the question of „ok, if you’ve issues why isn’t the UKs delivery impacted too?“. So is it really that surprising that they’re suspicious of the intentions of the UK Gov and AZ.

And as we all know when this Gov says „don’t do X“ it’s because it’s deflecting from the fact that it’s doing X. Today the UK gov said the EU shouldn’t „play vaccine nationalism“. :thinking: (obvi no criticism of Russia and China who are explicitly playing vaccine nationalism and are shouting it on their propaganda networks in multiple languages)

 

But the UK isn't playing vaccine nationalism. The reason why the UK is "unimpaired" by the supply issue is because the UK has factories here manufacturing the vaccine making it more easily distributed. Not to mention supplying the UK is a lot quicker due to the need for less doses compared to the 27 countries of the EU. Although in saying that the supply for the UK hasn't been on target either (oirignally 4 million doses were meant to be deivered/ready by the end of 2020 which didn't happen).

 

What's happened is the factories in the EU have not been able to keep up with the demand promised (which is much higher than the UK demand). Again, this is something for the company and EU to deal with and comes down to what is actually written in the agreement.

 

The EU engaged in "vaccine nationalism" first by threatening to stop exporting the Pfizer vaccine. The UK government, as much as I loathe them, hadn't said anything of the sort.

I would say the riots at the weekend have caused this emotional response from the EU as well.

?

^^ The ones in the Netherlands

It's worth noting that we need to work together to vaccinate everyone on the planet - it's all good getting the UK fully vaccinated, but not great if the virus continues to circulate in less vaccinated countries and develop harmful mutations. There is some serious short sighted attitude going on at the moment.

A 50 year-old woman says that Boris "has blood on his hands" after 4 members of her family all died after meeting up for Christmas day dinner. I'm sorry but, as others are saying too, he didn't force them to meet did he? She says that he gave permission for them to meet in their tier so he's directly responsible.

 

Her partner, both of his parents and uncle, all at the meal, have all since passed away, according to The Mail.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-91...amp;si=24507181

 

 

Four members of the same family have died from coronavirus since a Christmas Day meet-up bubble, the grieving partner of one of the victims has revealed

 

Mother-of-three Tracy Latham, 50, says she believes Prime Minister Boris Johnson has 'blood on his hands' after her partner, his parents and his uncle all passed away after catching the disease.

 

The family, who had been shielding since March, met up on Christmas Day after the Government relaxed rules and allowed households to meet for one day only.

 

The pair had been due to get married in July this year after spending 12 years together, during which time Mr Fisher helped raise three of Ms Latham's children from a previous relationship into adulthood.

 

Ms Latham, believes her partner caught the disease when he went to his parents' house in Allenton for just two hours.

 

Over the course of the following week, Mr Fisher, his parents Pat and David Fisher, aged 79 and 82, and his uncle, Michael Wilson, who was in his early 70s, all tested positive for the disease.

 

All of them have now passed away and another of Mr Fisher's uncles, Geoffrey, who also caught the disease is still recovering after becoming seriously ill.

Edited January 27, 20214 yr by common sense

A 50 year-old woman says that Boris "has blood on his hands" after 4 members of her family all died after meeting up for Christmas day dinner. I'm sorry but, as others are saying too, he didn't force them to meet did he? She says that he gave permission for them to meet in their tier so he's directly responsible.

 

He just said at a press conference yesterday evening that he 'took full responsibility'. Are you saying he is lying?? :wacko:

He just said at a press conference yesterday evening that he 'took full responsibility'. Are you saying he is lying?? :wacko:

 

 

No but even though he said families could meet for one day he didn't force anyone did he. A lot still didn't meet up and kept away from relatives for fear of catching it. Any court case for manslaughter would fail before it started. I doubt any solicitor would even take it on.

Edited January 27, 20214 yr by common sense

No but even thought he said families could meet for one day he didn't force anyone did he. A lot still didn't meet up and kept away from relatives for fear of catching it. Any court case would fail before it started.

 

He said.. he takes 'full responsibility'.

 

End of.

 

Of course he didn't force anyone. I mean he forced us back into the office last May ('or lose your job') but don't worry your pretty head about that as you haven't worked since 1978.

No; he didn't put a gun to anyone's head, but he spent months saying we could only meet if it was safe, and then said that people could meet. Basically saying that it was safe.

 

Compare: someone tells you can't cross the road when cars are coming because you'll die, and then tells you there aren't any cars coming.

He said.. he takes 'full responsibility'.

 

End of.

 

Of course he didn't force anyone. I mean he forced us back into the office last May ('or lose your job') but don't worry your pretty head about that as you haven't worked since 1978.

 

 

I do think it's a bit low to bring my work history up. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the posts or topic.

I do think it's a bit low to bring my work history up. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the posts or topic.

 

It did - the government told us to get back into the office or face losing our jobs in May. It was reported in the Telegraph. They forced us back, so it had direct relevance to the posts and topic.

 

If the EU win the case against AstraZeneca does that mean the vaccine rollout will be a lot slower in the UK?

 

If online commentary is to be believed, AstraZeneca seems to have overcommitted and screwed themselves at bit. The reason why the UK is receiving so much ahead of everywhere else is that AstraZeneca appears to have agreed that the UK manufacturing sites would supply the UK up to a certain number (we don't know what) first before those supplies can be diverted to third countries. If, as the EU is supposedly demanding, supplies are diverted from the UK to the EU, then I would have thought they would be in breach of contract with the UK.