Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Tubey]

lol you have absolutely no idea if that's the case.

We do. We know AZ supplies to UK from the EU factory have occurred.

And...

Kyriakides said AstraZeneca should provide vaccines from its UK facilities if it it is unable to meet commitments from factories in the EU.

UK announces coronavirus vaccine deal with Moderna

British Health Secretary Matt Hancock said the UK had secured an initial agreement to buy five million doses of the US vaccine.

www.politico.eu

Indicating the bulk of EU supplies aren't coming from the UK.

AZ insisted that its contracts made clear that the UK had first claim on vaccines produced domestically.

Vaccine war brewing as EU demands Covid jabs produced in UK

Boris Johnson insists he is ‘very confident’ of supplies of AstraZeneca doses

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Tubey]

They shouldn’t, and if our contract suffers as a result then we should absolutely go after the company for breach of contract. The same rules apply for the EU though, in terms of their deal with AZ.

Absolutely. But there's no evidence of either of those things happening.

Everything indicates the UK contract is being fulfilled to plan, and the EU contract - placed three months later- is adversely affected by an issue later on in the supply chain. AZ are refusing to breach a second contract to somewhat remedy the later contract, and rightly so.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Unless the EU and UK signed a contract for exactly the same supplies on a 50/50 basis, they're obviously separate orders.

Think logically - imagine, I dunno, Brazil came to AZ now and ordered one billion doses. They don't then just take the same share of vaccines as and when they're produced, as they ordered last. Naturally, if one country orders first, the production to meet that order is allocated - when a country orders last, they'll join the backlog and will be allocated supplies as and when.

We don't get Moderna vaccines until April I believe, with the US rolling it out now, for the same reason - US ordered August, we ordered November. It's just common sense.

Why are they obliviously separate?

Bear with me here:

The EU contract was signed in June with AZ. According to the Commission 'We signed an Advance Purchase Agreement for a product which at the time did not exist, and which still today is not yet authorised. And we signed it precisely to ensure that the company builds the manufacturing capacity to produce the vaccine early, so that they can deliver a certain volume of doses the day that it is authorised.’

That forms a commitment to build capacity to ensure that capacity can be met (unclear if this part covers best efforts or the supply).

The APA is here https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work...ons-and-answers-covid-19-vaccination-eu_en#20


The Commission have said that AZ view that the company is not obliged to deliver because we signed a ‘best effort’ agreement is neither correct nor is it acceptable...which would suggest that it is limited to building capacity and not supply.

The issue then becomes capacity within it's production (ie UK manufacturing). And the suggestion that UK production is being ring fenced for UK. Unless this was protected in the contract, AZ cannot state they don't have capacity as they are meeting (or at least trying to meet UK demand). So, the EU would give that as evidence to say 'where are ours?'

Two separate contractual issues - the building of capacity and the supply are in question, of which one or both parts may be subject to the 'best efforts'.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

We do. We know AZ supplies to UK from the EU factory have occurred.

And...

UK announces coronavirus vaccine deal with Moderna

British Health Secretary Matt Hancock said the UK had secured an initial agreement to buy five million doses of the US vaccine.

www.politico.eu

Indicating the bulk of EU supplies aren't coming from the UK.

Vaccine war brewing as EU demands Covid jabs produced in UK

Boris Johnson insists he is ‘very confident’ of supplies of AstraZeneca doses

www.independent.co.uk

The Independent article you cite has this from the Commission

“There is no hierarchy of the factories. You are aware in the contracts there are four factories listed but it does not differentiate between the UK and Europe. The UK factories are part of our advance purchase agreements and that is why they have to deliver,” she said.

There's nothing in either article stating that any of the vaccines have to be manufactured in certain locations or that those locations are only to sell the vaccines to the domestic market. Instead, it seems more logical that AZ would rather their UK factories be used for the UK market for logistical reasons, but no real legal text to mandate that.

 

[Tubey]

The Independent article you cite has this from the Commission

“There is no hierarchy of the factories. You are aware in the contracts there are four factories listed but it does not differentiate between the UK and Europe. The UK factories are part of our advance purchase agreements and that is why they have to deliver,” she said.

There's nothing in either article stating that any of the vaccines have to be manufactured in certain locations or that those locations are only to sell the vaccines to the domestic market.

I didn't say there was, and indeed said the opposite - EU factory vaccines have gone to the UK, and vice versa.

What I'm saying is that, logistically, it's self-apparent that UK vaccines will primarily be made at UK facilities, and indeed AZ have confirmed that is the case. So when fulfilling the orders, AZ have apportioned the vaccine production in set ways for each order, like any business would.

The EU suggestion that there's no 'hierarchy' of the factories is a nonsense - of course there is. Every business organises production and logistics to an optimum way. The idea the EU order was to be fulfilled equally between all factories is stupid; the UK production would have been fenced off to meet UK demand first, as the order was three months earlier, and similarly the EU production would be primarily for the EU, which is why a hiccup there has adversely affected them much more.

The way out of this isn't for the EU to blame their own failings on an unavoidable issue with AZ (who, yes, have breached the contract, albeit through no deliberate action of their own) but to open discussions with the UK government to see if there's a chance the comparative oversupply can be smoothed out by the UK giving vaccines bilaterally to the EU on a short term basis.

 

[peteblue]

There you go again. As I said previously, you have absolutely no idea what the actual problem is. I've heard people suggesting that the UK plants had 3 months longer to iron out problems, which would suggest that there is absolutely zero communication or knowledge sharing across the AZ supply chain (which is possible, but none of us know that), or it could be that the Belgian plant has a completely new issue that could not have been foreseen.

Now you might also argue that as soon as AZ started getting significant orders that they might start building up their manufacturing capabilities across Europe and stress testing that to make sure that no issues emerged. But again, we don't know any of the work that was done with the €300 million the Commission gave AZ to ensure that happened (not even where that money was spent to my knowledge?)

Bruce, a mate of mine works with 3M and his engineering group are responsible for setting up various product production lines. He was always telling me about problems of set up, yield, rate of production etc etc. Needless to say there is a fair bit involved and it is a highly skilled job. Many times there were bringing in Engineers from around the world to deal with specific issues on the lines. This was just putting the product into suitable packaging, never mind the actual manufacture of the product.

The attached gives a tiny bit of understanding of the issues the vaccine manufacturers face...

The complexity and cost of vaccine manufacturing – An overview - PMC

As companies, countries, and governments consider investments in vaccine production for routine immunization and outbreak response, understanding the complexity and cost drivers associated with vaccine production will help to inform business ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Tubey]

Why are they obliviously separate?

Bear with me here:

The EU contract was signed in June with AZ. According to the Commission 'We signed an Advance Purchase Agreement for a product which at the time did not exist, and which still today is not yet authorised. And we signed it precisely to ensure that the company builds the manufacturing capacity to produce the vaccine early, so that they can deliver a certain volume of doses the day that it is authorised.’

That forms a commitment to build capacity to ensure that capacity can be met (unclear if this part covers best efforts or the supply).

The APA is here https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work...ons-and-answers-covid-19-vaccination-eu_en#20


The Commission have said that AZ view that the company is not obliged to deliver because we signed a ‘best effort’ agreement is neither correct nor is it acceptable...which would suggest that it is limited to building capacity and not supply.

The issue then becomes capacity within it's production (ie UK manufacturing). And the suggestion that UK production is being ring fenced for UK. Unless this was protected in the contract, AZ cannot state they don't have capacity as they are meeting (or at least trying to meet UK demand). So, the EU would give that as evidence to say 'where are ours?'

Two separate contractual issues - the building of capacity and the supply are in question, of which one or both parts may be subject to the 'best efforts'.

It's not up to the EU to tell AZ how to organise their business.

The EU simply ask for the vaccine, AZ fulfil it. If they don't, they breach contract, but the EU can't then dictate that AZ breach another contract to fulfil their one.

If (and it's a massive if) AZ told the EU the UK factories would supply a set amount of vaccines and they are now not doing so, that's a deliberate breach. However, as they've stated there's no "hierarchy" of factories, they haven't done that, whereas the UK did by ringfencing domestic vaccine production in their contract.

They are, therefore, two separate contracts, and the fulfilment of the UK one has no bearing on the non-fulfilment of the EU one.

 

[Billy Dean]

Don't think there's much doubt the eu stuffed up big time but once we get our old and vulnerable sorted in next couple of weeks i wouldn't have any problem sending some uk vaccine over to help we're all in this together.

Funnily enough as a resident of the EU I would prefer the UK supply not to be affected by all this. AZ have promised a certain amount to both sides so they should fulfill it IMO.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

It's also a reality check for those who continually demonise big pharma - Labour have been really guilty of this.

A few weeks back, but more articulate than I could ever put it;

Too right, it's has some terrible practises and Astrazenica is associated with dubious societies such as Wellcome Trust .

And none of them would have touched doing a vaccine without significant public funding as vaccines are terrible difficult and costly to manufacture, and they would have not exposed their shareholders to the risk without significant amounts tax payer monies.

 

[The binman chronicles]

it's about the only thing we did well. By pre-ordering and approving the vaccines early we got a jump on everyone else.

 

[Jebus_lives]

It's not up to the EU to tell AZ how to organise their business.

The EU simply ask for the vaccine, AZ fulfil it. If they don't, they breach contract, but the EU can't then dictate that AZ breach another contract to fulfil their one.

If (and it's a massive if) AZ told the EU the UK factories would supply a set amount of vaccines and they are now not doing so, that's a deliberate breach. However, as they've stated there's no "hierarchy" of factories, they haven't done that, whereas the UK did by ringfencing domestic vaccine production in their contract.

They are, therefore, two separate contracts, and the fulfilment of the UK one has no bearing on the non-fulfilment of the EU one.

No, but it is up to the EU to determine if and when it's contract will be fulfilled. And if they have an agreement, which seeks to build in production capacity, to deliver on an agreement to supply vaccines to them, to an agreed level, then it's incumbent upon AZ to meet that contract or face the penalties.

 

[tsubaki]

Absolutely. But there's no evidence of either of those things happening.

Everything indicates the UK contract is being fulfilled to plan, and the EU contract - placed three months later- is adversely affected by an issue later on in the supply chain. AZ are refusing to breach a second contract to somewhat remedy the later contract, and rightly so.

Well there’s loads of evidence that AZ aren’t complying with the EU contract - as has been said loads already.

I just think it’s mad that people are willing to give them a pass and blame the EU when the fault lies, and really can only lie if you accept the production problems issue, with AZ.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Absolutely. But there's no evidence of either of those things happening.

Everything indicates the UK contract is being fulfilled to plan, and the EU contract - placed three months later- is adversely affected by an issue later on in the supply chain. AZ are refusing to breach a second contract to somewhat remedy the later contract, and rightly so.

Precisely why the EU are annoyed.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

I’d just like to say I haven’t got a clue what’s going on here anymore.

 

[Tubey]

No, but it is up to the EU to determine if and when it's contract will be fulfilled. And if they have an agreement, which seeks to build in production capacity, to deliver on an agreement to supply vaccines to them, to an agreed level, then it's incumbent upon AZ to meet that contract or face the penalties.

Of course - no one is disputing they've breached contract. They have. The only question is to the reasoning for it.

And the reasoning is almost certainly not that vaccines destined for the EU have been diverted to the UK. And rectifying the problem shouldn't involved vaccines destined to the UK being withheld or demanded by the EU.

It's a supply issue, the EU have got unlucky but it's compounded by them being comparatively late on the order. They know it, and they hate it, so they're scrambling around for blame.