Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Jebus_lives]

Erm... yeah? What right does the EU have to telling AZ to not fulfil a contract with the UK when the UK ordered first? They were first in line - it's equitable that they distribute that way.

It doesn't. And I doubt it's legally enforceable to to compel a Best Endeavors clause to force someone to interfere with another contract.

But just because the UK ordered first, should not have any bearing on a separate contract between AZ and the EU.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

People seem to just jump on the side they're on regardless of facts.

"I'm pro-EU so I'll defend the EU."

No. If they've screwed up, they've screwed up. They ordered too late due to their internal bureaucracy, and it's made them wide open to issues if the supply lines have a problem early doors. The UK ordered early, and avoided getting hit as hard by supply issues.

It's really that simple. It's like being first in line for a PS5 and getting one, and then the person who turns up a few hours later moaning at the store for selling the PS5 to the person first in line.

They know that as well, hence the bizarre comparisons to a butchers shop.

The UK also saw it coming a mile off - they said as much in July when people were claiming the UK only rejected EU out of Brexit ideology.

 

[Tubey]

It doesn't. And I doubt it's legally enforceable to to compel a Best Endeavors clause to force someone to interfere with another contract.

But just because the UK ordered first, should not have any bearing on a separate contract between AZ and the EU.

Exactly. But at the same time, the EU shouldn't moan at AZ for fulfilling an earlier contract that has no bearing on their own supply, and demanding that contract be interfered with.

 

[Jebus_lives]

No, because the UK supply hasn't taken away from the EU supply, but because there's an issue with EU supply, the EU want to take away from the UK supply.

So the EU wants to punish the UK for being more efficient, rather than own their own mess.

I'm not a nationalist by any stretch of the imagination, hate Johnson, hate this Tory government, actually pro-EU - but you have to judge the facts on their own merits and take subjectivity out of it as much as possible.

I'm not sure that's right at all and I cannot understand where that viewpoint comes from.

The EU, at best is pushing AZ to meet it's contractual obligations. The precise terms of which we don't know...

The 'facts' are that the EU think they have a best Endeavors contract with AZ for vaccines which they've been told will be reduced by 60% which may or may not include access to UK produced vaccines.

 

[arminisgod]

Germany won't approve the AZ vaccine for over 65s.

Gets everyone out of a hole bar the unfortunate over 65's in Europe that will now suffer.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Exactly. But at the same time, the EU shouldn't moan at AZ for fulfilling an earlier contract that has no bearing on their own supply, and demanding that contract be interfered with.

It does have a bearing on their supply if AZ are choosing to honour that contract over the contract with the EU.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Erm... yeah? What right does the EU have to telling AZ to not fulfil a contract with the UK when the UK ordered first? They were first in line - it's equitable that they distribute that way.

Sorry but that's silly. The UK has ordered 100 million AZ vaccines. It's not like all of those will be delivered before the EU gets any, just because that's the order the contracts were signed.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

No, because the UK supply hasn't taken away from the EU supply, but because there's an issue with EU supply, the EU want to take away from the UK supply.

So the EU wants to punish the UK for being more efficient, rather than own their own mess.

I'm not a nationalist by any stretch of the imagination, hate Johnson, hate this Tory government, actually pro-EU - but you have to judge the facts on their own merits and take subjectivity out of it as much as possible.

You're not a nationalist but you're up to your old trick of assuming something of which you actually know very little and stating it with the utmost certainty. To the best of my knowledge you're not someone that has worked in the pharma industry, nor the associated manufacturing supply chain, and have not seen either of the contracts signed with the UK or EU. Maybe a bit of humility would serve you well.

 

[Neiler]

I am very pleased that the U.K. is not part of the EU shambles regarding vaccines. Obviously things will change regarding available vaccines and numbers and no doubt the EU will sort itself out, eventually. Personally I would take no interest in the EMA statement as it’s already been politicised by Germany and the EU with an obvious outcome.....

We're both prophets in our own right mate.

HSE aware of German decision on Astrazeneca vaccine but will follow EMA advice on over 65s

The EMA is expected to make a decision on approval tomorrow and will issue guidance on use of the vaccine.

www.thejournal.ie

 

[Tubey]

You're not a nationalist but you're up to your old trick of assuming something of which you actually know very little and stating it with the utmost certainty. To the best of my knowledge you're not someone that has worked in the pharma industry, nor the associated manufacturing supply chain, and have not seen either of the contracts signed with the UK or EU. Maybe a bit of humility would serve you well.

I talked of probability and Occams Razor - I'm talking of likelihood.

Whereas you're talking from a position of Pro-EU bias. Perhaps take your own advice.

 

[Jebus_lives]

They're selling it at cost. If you mean too costly to scale up, then fine, but if that were the case they simply wouldn't scale up or change the price. They haven't, which indicates they're simply telling the truth - production issue, UK ordered earlier, less affected, EU ordered later, more affected.

Yes exactly what I mean. A reluctance to may be the difference between 'best efforts/endeavors' and 'reasoble efforts' in contract terms.

 

[peteblue]

Interesting summary of media coverage;

Formerly pro EU newspapers turn on the bloc over 'vaccine nationalism' and 'playground bully' tactics

Even the UK’s formerly pro-European newspapers have rounded on the EU over the Commission’s threats to halt vaccine exports and its call for Astra Zeneca to divert UK vaccine production to Europe. The FT, which has long been a supporter of UK EU membership, writes in its leader: “…the commission...

pressgazette.co.uk

Sums it up nicely I thought, but it won’t convince the one eyed Europhiles ......

 

[Tubey]

It does have a bearing on their supply if AZ are choosing to honour that contract over the contract with the EU.

That's a massive if and just doesn't seem likely.

To take the PS5 analogy - say Sony sells one million to Argos, they then allocate how they'll get that one million to Argos. Three months later, Smyths orders one million. But there's then a production backup.

As a business, you don't take away from the allocation to Argos just to fulfil a later order from Smyths, harming both supply chains. In short, you don't breach one contract to lessen the severity of the breach to another, as it'd be unethical and result in two breached contracts.

It's not about choosing to honour one contract over another, it's about adapting to circumstance. What are AZ meant to do - cut off the UK from all vaccine supplies til the EU has caught up, when it's not the fault of the UK in the slightest?

And again, what motive - at all - does the EU have in deliberately not fulfilling the contract? They have literally none.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I talked of probability and Occams Razor - I'm talking of likelihood.

Whereas you're talking from a position of Pro-EU bias. Perhaps take your own advice.

In the last 20 minutes or so you've stated with certainty that the UK/AZ contract secured supplies from the UK factory and that the chronological order of the signings will influence the delivery of vaccines. You have no idea if either of those things are true. You've also stated repeatedly that the AZ vaccine is being produced at cost, despite it being well documented that there are significant price differences between the EU and US, (and recently also countries like South Africa).

Equally, we have no idea what the problems have been at the Belgian plant, whether the Wrexham plant suffered from similar issues, if they did why were lessons not learned from that to ensure smoother production, how much capacity the British plants have and whether they can be diverted to the EU (either practically or legally).

All we know for certain is that an agreement was struck for the delivery of a lot more vaccines than have been delivered.

 

[Billy Dean]

That's a massive if and just doesn't seem likely.

To take the PS5 analogy - say Sony sells one million to Argos, they then allocate how they'll get that one million to Argos. Three months later, Smyths orders one million. But there's then a production backup.

As a business, you don't take away from the allocation to Argos just to fulfil a later order from Smyths, harming both supply chains. In short, you don't breach one contract to lessen the severity of the breach to another, as it'd be unethical and result in two breached contracts.

It's not about choosing to honour one contract over another, it's about adapting to circumstance. What are AZ meant to do - cut off the UK from all vaccine supplies til the EU has caught up, when it's not the fault of the UK in the slightest?

And again, what motive - at all - does the EU have in deliberately not fulfilling the contract? They have literally none.

It would depend on what is discussed between Sony and Smiths no? If Sony have said to Smiths you'll get your PS5s by X date and sign a contract on that basis, then Smiths might get miffed if Sony come back later and say they can't do it.

Are the EU actually telling AZ to reduce supply to UK, or just that they should use the UK factories to supply them too?