Why should the UK vaccine supply be diverted to Europe?

[lovelemoncurd]

They ordered 3 months later than the UK. They have themselves less time to sort glitches. They have been slow to the table and now they wish to punish to UK for being efficient.

I was a remain voter. I'm starting to change my mind!

jcyclops
I like your thinking

Possibly because the first 3-4 million doses of the vaccine used here were diverted from European factories. It’s been reported multiple times it’s the Telegraph and the Independent, but seems to have been conveniently forgotten in the current row.

Had we still been in the EU we'd have been subject to their rules and have made progress as pitifully slowly as them. And because we obey all the rules with knobs on we wouldn't even have made side orders for the vaccine like Germany et al.

@MyHeartIsNeverOnTime

Possibly because the first 3-4 million doses of the vaccine used here were diverted from European factories. It’s been reported multiple times it’s the Telegraph and the Independent, but seems to have been conveniently forgotten in the current row.

Have you got a link? And if true was that in violation of Britain's contract with AZ, which, according to the CEO, stipulated that Britain's order should be fulfilled before that of anyone who was yet to sign a contract, incl the EU?

@NotGenerationAlpha Remember at the start of this, the US blocked shipments of PPE out of the country?
Germany blocked PPE shipments to northern Italy in March, same tricks in a different year.

As I said on another thread, UK supplies should be used to help RoI with any short-term shortage, to keep pace with UK. Shared healthcare support and the Common Travel Area would make that valuable to both countries, as well as the tiny population numbers making it achievable.

Providing vaccines to the whole EU.on the other hand is much like noble grandiose statements about helping the whole world, it's too large a population whereby the suffering caused by a vastly reduced availability to UK residents wouldn't actually make much impact on a positive side for new recipients. It's a short-term issue for them to resolve set-up problems, calmer heads in the EU will hopefully recognise that soon.

@MRex thanks I didn’t remember that one. What I’m saying is I’m not surprised about the every man for himself attitude. And I expect more of it to come. From every nation.

@Spodge we won’t have. We opted out of that when we were still in the EU.

What do mean diverted from European factories? They were never intended for the EU because the EU a) has still not approved the vaccine and b) the UK had already ordered them.

That's like saying my local ALDI has 'diverted' the cucumber that I bought the other day from Spain to the UK.

you

[quote NotGenerationAlpha]@MRex thanks I didn’t remember that one. What I’m saying is I’m not surprised about the every man for himself attitude. And I expect more of it to come. From every nation.[/quote]
Yes.

Plus, this 'vaccinate the world' thing also has an obvious element of self-interest, in the sense that we need to have the virus at low levels globally in order for travel and trade to resume at normal levels. There's no urgent desire to find a cure for malaria for example, which still kills about half a million every year. Just not in rich countries.

@IcedPurple

There were a bunch of detailed stories on it in the Telegraph a few weeks back that I’m struggling to find now. But from the Independent:

More than 80 per cent of the 100 million doses AstraZeneca will produce for the UK will be made in the country, but the first batches will come from outside the domestic supply chain.

“The initial supply, and it’s a little bit of a quirk of the programme, actually comes from the Netherlands and Germany,” Ian McCubbin, the manufacturing lead for the Vaccine Taskforce.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-vaccine-oxford-approved-matt-hancock-germany-netherlands-b1780320.html

I would think that as the U.K. signed up 5 months ago and if AZ decided to give the contracted vaccines to Eu instead then they could be sued for breach of contract.

The EU are heavily into Pfizer supply. They are probably realising the limitations of this in a mass programme or any type of programme for that matter.

[quote MyHeartIsNeverOnTime]@IcedPurple

There were a bunch of detailed stories on it in the Telegraph a few weeks back that I’m struggling to find now. But from the Independent:

More than 80 per cent of the 100 million doses AstraZeneca will produce for the UK will be made in the country, but the first batches will come from outside the domestic supply chain.

“The initial supply, and it’s a little bit of a quirk of the programme, actually comes from the Netherlands and Germany,” Ian McCubbin, the manufacturing lead for the Vaccine Taskforce.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-vaccine-oxford-approved-matt-hancock-germany-netherlands-b1780320.html[/quote]
So what though?

The UK had put in an order and approved the vaccine. The EU had not. In fact, it still hasn't approved it as we speak! The supplies weren't being 'diverted'. They were being delivered to a paying customer. I'm not seeing a problem here. Are you?

But that just says they were made in the EU, not that they were intended for the EU.

@FOJN

If I recall correctly there were a few EU countries who set the ball rolling with AstraZeneca at roughly the same time as the UK but the EU intervened to take over negotiations for the whole of the EU, which is how the 3 month delay occurred. Delays on the Sanofi vaccine keep increasing (current ETA end of the year) and the other French vaccine has been abandoned entirely due to poor results. That company will now manufacture for Pfizer.

Quite....

I'd also add that had the U.K. been behind the EU I'm pretty damn sure they would be politicising that by talking about the downside of Brexit and I doubt they'd be offering up some of their supplies to us.

It's deeply hypocritical.

Many EU countries blocked the export of PPE for example.

The simple fact is the EU placed their order later and given we have one of the highest death rates I'm not sure of any justification to share our supply (especially in light of the fact anything we could offer wouldn't be more than a drop in the ocean re: the EU population).

To be fair isn't Oxford Uni working on a malaria vaccine with some funding from Bill Gates, but it's proving a nightmare finding one that will work.

The UK hasn't diverted anyone's vaccines, all our supplies have been legally procured. Our government acted very early and set up a excellent portfolio, and the MHRA and JCVI got straight on it as well.

@Waspnest

To be fair isn't Oxford Uni working on a malaria vaccine with some funding from Bill Gates, but it's proving a nightmare finding one that will work.

But compare that to the vast amounts of money which flooded in for Covid vaccine funding. I remember hearing an interview with one of the people involved with the Oxford programme. He had been working on vaccines for decades, and he said that whereas in the past they'd have to hustle for funding, this time he was inundated with phone calls from organisations offering him however much money he wanted. And this wasn't really charity, it was enlightened self-interest. Malaria just isn't a problem for richer countries.

@IcedPurple

Link to the exact number:

Although the first batch of four million doses will be delivered from the Netherlands and Germany, the bulk of manufacturing will take place in this country, allowing for easy access.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/18/exclusive-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-expecting-approval-within/

[quote MyHeartIsNeverOnTime]@IcedPurple

Link to the exact number:

Although the first batch of four million doses will be delivered from the Netherlands and Germany, the bulk of manufacturing will take place in this country, allowing for easy access.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/18/exclusive-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-expecting-approval-within/[/quote]
What's your point?

I don’t know if the EU will actually be prepared to supersede contract law and, effectively, steal the vaccine from us.

I don't see how they could do that even if they wanted to. AstraZeneca vaccines intended for the UK are manufactured in the UK. The EU can (and did) ask them to divert some of the supplies from the UK plant to cover the shortfall, but that would go against the terms of AZ's contract with the UK, and they have no incentive to land themselves in what would probably be much worse legal trouble with our own government by agreeing. They're not even making a profit on the vaccine.

Malaria just isn't a problem for richer countries.

Yes I agree. But whilst I'm generally cynical about things I am heartened by things like AZ providing their vaccine at cost for a lot of the world and other companies in the past providing HIV drugs to poorer countries (and so on).

I thought the La Repubblica article was really interesting as well. Well worth a read cos it explains everything really clearly!

Given that AZ are producing this vaccine for zero profit, it seems completely unacceptable to be talking about suing them. According to the CEO he is fulfilling his contract with the EU. They agreed to “use their best efforts” to supply X number of vaccines. They knew the problems that they would have scaling up and weren’t stupid when negotiating by over promising / under delivering!

A few EU countries did start negotiations with AZ around the same time as the UK but then the EU commission took over negotiations. It took them another 3 months and the final agreed contract was not substantially different. So they wasted 3 months for no reason whatsoever!

They essentially want our supplies made in the UK diverted to supply their contract, completely disregarding our contract with AZ.

@psychomath - they are talking about withholding Pfizer vaccines intended for the UK. That would be theft.