There's another vaccine! And we've got 60 million shots! And it's made here!

[HelloThereMeHearties]

And it's effective against the new UK variant!

And it will really wind the EU up!!!

Novavax has passed its stage three trial, now hopefully the MHRA will approve it!!!

@Avondklok

Everyone is framing this in EU vs U.K light which is not accurate. The EU are not throwing their toys out. they have a contract and have invested money in U.K. manufacturing which has allowed U.K. to get their vaccines. When the EU wants their vaccines AZ are now breaching the contract.

The EU have no legal case. Their contract clearly stated they would have the doses they ordered providing the manufacturing processes was able to fulfil the volumes required. Some (in Belgium I believe) have had poor yields so could not supply the volume required. The contract signed by the EU accepted this as a condition as vaccine production is not the same as widgets.

The UK signed the contract 3 months ahead of the EU and licensed it much earlier, as well as the UK government financing some of the research at Oxford university. I think this gives the UK far more rights to vaccine supplies than the EU who are definitely throwing their toys out of the pram.

This was put out in a statement by the French CEO of Astra Zeneca.

This isn't about Brexit so stop the idiocy. The UK has been criticised for their handling of the pandemic and now they're being criticised for their exit strategy.

[quote FitzsimmonsMarvel]@Hopeisnotastrategy oh god and now we have a conspiracy theorist trotting out the old ‘ if I got hit by a bus it’s a covid death’ line [/quote]
Perhaps you could furnish us with the UK criteria rather than being unnecessarily rude, seeing as you are such an expert?

We are undoubtedly counting far more deaths than other countries.

@AlexisCarringtonColbyDexter

I cannot read anywhere that the EU has told the UK govt to hand over AZ vaccine?

They are demanding that AZ fulfill their contract - just as we are.

I agree with you that we need to be working together and in that, i think we should vaccinate our vulnerable asap (with 2 doses) and then allow vaccine to be sent to the EU.

Experts seem to think CV will need seasonal jabs, meaning herd immunity cannot be acquired.

The EUs and UKs interests are one, so much of UK medicines come from europe as does food and trade, a series of escalating trade wars is in no ones interests.

[quote Hopeisnotastrategy]**@thedancingbear "We have the worst death rate per capita of any major country".

This is in large part because of the way we are counting deaths - wrongly, in my opinion. I understand that in the UK anyone diagnosed in the previous 28 days who subsequently dies is attributed to Covid-19, even if they were run over by a bus. You would think there would be an international protocol for things like this so accurate comparisons could be made.

Interestingly, I read the other day that if we were counting deaths the same way as the Germans we'd "only" be at around 25,000.[/quote]
Where did you read that.
I'm not denying, I've seen the government advice given to coroners on the registration of deaths.

[quote FitzsimmonsMarvel]@Hopeisnotastrategy oh god and now we have a conspiracy theorist trotting out the old ‘ if I got hit by a bus it’s a covid death’ line [/quote]
The definition of conspiracy theorist is not someone who disagrees with you.

If you want to comment why not formulate a proper argument to counteract the poster’s claims. Instead you just post some boring, intellectually lazy “oh you’re a conspiracy theorist” crap. What’s the point?

I ve read Cv is a hoax, hospitals aren't at capacity and vaccines carry tracking chips....... must be true lol!

Sounds like great news!

Could anyone explain the issues with the EU please? I'm really not sure I fully understand what's going on.

The UK signed the contract 3 months ahead of the EU and licensed it much earlier, as well as the UK government financing some of the research at Oxford university. I think this gives the UK far more rights to vaccine supplies than the EU who are definitely throwing their toys out of the pram.

Please explain how you have reached this conclusion. It doesn't represent any interpretation of contract law i've encountered. Earlier-signed contracts do not, as a rule, trump later ones.

I don’t think this is about U.K. leaving for EU

It’s more about looking bad to member states for delaying

The response is a show of political muscle since lack of a contractual basis.

(I haven’t seen contracts obvs but just from elements and reading views they may not have a case)

[quote Bluethrough]@AlexisCarringtonColbyDexter

I cannot read anywhere that the EU has told the UK govt to hand over AZ vaccine?

They are demanding that AZ fulfill their contract - just as we are.

I agree with you that we need to be working together and in that, i think we should vaccinate our vulnerable asap (with 2 doses) and then allow vaccine to be sent to the EU.

Experts seem to think CV will need seasonal jabs, meaning herd immunity cannot be acquired.

The EUs and UKs interests are one, so much of UK medicines come from europe as does food and trade, a series of escalating trade wars is in no ones interests.[/quote]
The EU requested that AZ divert vaccine stocks from UK plants, not from UK govt.

However, it isn't known if AZ was right to say 'no' based on it's contract with the UK. Of course, the EU are entitled to get their contract fulfilled but there is an expectation on their part that they be supplied as the same time as the UK even though the UK contract predates theirs by 3 months. Also, we don't know what the UK contract says about being supplied first.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/covid-vaccine-eu-boris-johnson-b1793652.html

I cannot read anywhere that the EU has told the UK govt to hand over AZ vaccine

There is talk of them blocking millions of doses of the vaccine being transported to the UK so it can be diverted to the EU instead.

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/28/belgium-launches-investigation-of-astrazeneca-vaccine-plant

@samanthawashington can you share your copy of the contract with us all given that it ‘clearly states’ what you are saying?

The way I look at this issue simply is that there are two companies who are responsible for feeding their staff. Company A (U.K.) order 200 loaves of bread and pays for these in advance. Company A orders in January and expects to get 100 loaves in Feb and 100 loaves in March. They get their 100 loaves in Feb. Company B (EU) comes along in February and orders 200 loaves of bread. They pay for them in advance and are told that 100 of them will be ready to collect in march. March arrives and company A is told they can only have 25 loaves as there was a production problem in the bakery. It turns out that even though the bakery had 125 loaves they decided to give 100 to Company A and the leftover to Company B. Company B is unhappy as they paid for 100 loaves, they were told to collect them in March yet they only get 25. Given everyone is hungry company B is unhappy and thinks as both companies paid for 100 and both companies were told they could pick them up in March that a production issue should have meant that each company got 65 and the shortfall was made up in the next order. Especially as company A has already been given 100 loaves in the first place. To me company B has a good point.

@thedancingbear

The UK signed the contract 3 months ahead of the EU and licensed it much earlier, as well as the UK government financing some of the research at Oxford university. I think this gives the UK far more rights to vaccine supplies than the EU who are definitely throwing their toys out of the pram.

Please explain how you have reached this conclusion. It doesn't represent any interpretation of contract law i've encountered. Earlier-signed contracts do not, as a rule, trump later ones.

And where, in contact law, does it say if your supplier fails to supply you, you can commandeer goods from other customers? Which is what they want to do.

Britain does badly compared to other countries: "God this country is shameful. Look how much better other places are doing. Why aren't we doing that? It's all because of brexit/Boris/gammon'.

Britain does well compared to other countries: 'oh god this is shameful. Its not a competition, this flag waving is because of brexit/Boris/gammon'

@MorrisZapp

Britain does badly compared to other countries: "God this country is shameful. Look how much better other places are doing. Why aren't we doing that? It's all because of brexit/Boris/gammon'.

Britain does well compared to other countries: 'oh god this is shameful. Its not a competition, this flag waving is because of brexit/Boris/gammon'

Ha yep

I'm delighted and proud that important scientific work is done here in the UK, and that vaccines are more available to us. It's brilliant!

But this "we won, haha fuck Europe" attitude makes me so sad.

Of course we should be rightly proud of what many people here have worked to achieve, of course this is a brilliant country! But as a European who has settled here, this crowing attitude just makes me so sad. Why cant we just be happy about what the brilliant scientists have achieved. Why does it have to be a competition.

But I guess I'm not British so who cares what I think

you forgot "And the EU is just doing its job. What did you expect?"

Are you Katya Adler on a coffee pause?

@MorrisZapp

Britain does badly compared to other countries: "God this country is shameful. Look how much better other places are doing. Why aren't we doing that? It's all because of brexit/Boris/gammon'.

Britain does well compared to other countries: 'oh god this is shameful. Its not a competition, this flag waving is because of brexit/Boris/gammon'

SO true

For anyone who fancies some contract reading and commenting EU /AZ contract

ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_302

the eu is spectacularly failing its people right now

Funny, I'm an EU citizen living in a EU country that receives a lot of bashing on here, and I don't feel like they're failing us.

Like other PP said, both the EU, the UK and every country in the world has done mistakes and also achieved good things.

I feel protected where I live. There are strong measures in place, respected by most citizens. Because we (mostly) trust our government. Our incidence is under 100, in the middle of winter. Our hospitals are not overwhelmed. Life is fairly normal, even with lockdown.

I have a roof over my head. If this had happened a year earlier, when I was still living in England, I would now be homeless and unable to afford food. The country I live in has made sure I'm still being paid each month.

I can still work, because even non-essential industries have been giving the financial support they need to keep going. I'm in performing arts and everything in the UK is shut. 'Too unsafe, and we're in a lockdown'. No it's not unsafe, we too are in a lockdown but I still work with 100 other people without any social distancing each day, and it's perfectly safe. There just needs to be millions of pounds of investment in these 'non-essential' industries. The economy keeps going, people and their mental health keep going, and we're not headed for a major economical recession.

Vaccines - yes, they could go faster and organise it better. But, I feel safe knowing they haven't rushed into a mass vaccination programme without triple-checking everything and making sure they have enough doses to vaccinate people as per the trials schedule, instead of delaying the second dose with absolutely no scientific data backing up this decision.

We have less deaths than the UK, less people have lost their jobs, and the handling of the pandemic has been so much better. UK is vaccinating faster and that's also amazing. This is not a competition though, we shouldn't be celebrating the failures of other countries.

@MarshaBradyo thank you. I await the comment from the lawyers with interest.

Sorry that was a joke in response to MorrissZapp.

I have no fundamental objection to the EU or the UK or the Scottish Government. I just don't see how any of them are worthy of glowing testimonials.

@thedancingbear

The UK signed the contract 3 months ahead of the EU and licensed it much earlier, as well as the UK government financing some of the research at Oxford university. I think this gives the UK far more rights to vaccine supplies than the EU who are definitely throwing their toys out of the pram.

Please explain how you have reached this conclusion. It doesn't represent any interpretation of contract law i've encountered. Earlier-signed contracts do not, as a rule, trump later ones.

Quite.

There is talk of them blocking millions of doses of the vaccine being transported to the UK so it can be diverted to the EU instead

Thats not EU telling UK to hand over vaccine but it is hearsay.

Given most on here think its the duty of the state to vaccinate its own first, Belgium is also right to keep these vaccines for itself?

[quote FitzsimmonsMarvel]@samanthawashington can you share your copy of the contract with us all given that it ‘clearly states’ what you are saying?

The way I look at this issue simply is that there are two companies who are responsible for feeding their staff. Company A (U.K.) order 200 loaves of bread and pays for these in advance. Company A orders in January and expects to get 100 loaves in Feb and 100 loaves in March. They get their 100 loaves in Feb. Company B (EU) comes along in February and orders 200 loaves of bread. They pay for them in advance and are told that 100 of them will be ready to collect in march. March arrives and company A is told they can only have 25 loaves as there was a production problem in the bakery. It turns out that even though the bakery had 125 loaves they decided to give 100 to Company A and the leftover to Company B. Company B is unhappy as they paid for 100 loaves, they were told to collect them in March yet they only get 25. Given everyone is hungry company B is unhappy and thinks as both companies paid for 100 and both companies were told they could pick them up in March that a production issue should have meant that each company got 65 and the shortfall was made up in the next order. Especially as company A has already been given 100 loaves in the first place. To me company B has a good point.[/quote]
But what if company A just has an order for 100 loaves, and company B has a contract for 100 loaves with a clause saying ‘so long as production allows’.
Do you still think they should get the same, even though they have different contracts?

Isn’t that the point?
there is a clause in the EU contract which isn’t in the UK contract. That they are not technically in breach of the contract with the EU, while they would be in breach of the UK one.
That’s my understanding.

I’m sure the lawyers will be all over it anyhow.

And going back to your ability, even if company B did have a point, they need to take it up with the suppliers, not company A.