4 ms·

I'm British. I do however believe we should vaccinate the most at risk groups, then be more generous with the UK production facilities for the EU's more at risk

I'm British. I do however believe we should vaccinate the most at risk groups, then be more generous with the UK production facilities for the EU's more at risk groups whilst slowing down our efforts for our own less at risk ones (which includes me). It's the humane thing to do. That said, my sympathy for the EU (as an opponent of Brexit) has been diminished by their attempted bullying behaviour. They initially wanted the UK in on their EU procurement. Unlike the EU members of the grouping we were to be excluded from any say in the vaccines chosen, the quantities, the pricing, the manufacturing, and the distribution. No say on anything; take what you're given. They left us with no choice but to do our own deals. We did those deals faster and with less guarantees at that early stage, fronted virtually the whole cost of the AstraZeneca UK production, accepted liability rather than insisting (as per the EU) that the vaccine makers did, and paid much more, just to get a faster agreement (and we still had the same teething issues the EU are facing now; we weren't special in that regard). Despite all that risk, up front cost, higher prices, and accepted liability, the EU is now demanding that the instant they approve the vaccine they can dip into the supply that has cost the UK far more than most people realise we gave up in order to get that swift delivery. The EU stumbled by not realising the urgency last year, then stumbled again by badly insulting the UK with the EU procurement "offer" terms which forced us to negotiate separately. I have a great amount of sympathy for the EU people (I may not be in the EU any more, but I'm still European) but none of this is the doing of the UK - who are simply carrying on using the vaccines delivered - and the first 'shot' at actual vaccine nationalism has been fired not by the mad brexiteers but by the EU with their Northern Ireland border statements and not-export-control-really new 'monitoring' and 'agreement' position. I really expected coming into this year to find myself part of a massive UK villain state facing a more reasonable EU. I didn't foresee a desparate EU attacking a UK just going about it's own business.

senko 6y ago
As a EU citizen, I agree with your assessment completely. The EU bungled this and it would not be fair if we were to bully our way out of it. It's sad to see this being a zero sum game, and no way you cut it people are going to suffer (already are) somewhere. I was expecting a bit more decency on our side. Shattered superiority complex after Brits mismanaged Brexit, maybe? Our lack of coordination and flailing in this regard is equally impressive.
noncoml 6y ago
On the other hand I am a EU citizen married to UK citizen, living in the US, so my skin in the game is mainly emotional. I am not saying EU was/is always right, as they don't seem to be right in this case, but I was just hoping that BBC would be more subtle about it. I am totally fine with UK/AstraZeneca pushing back hard. Just don't see the need for BBC to turn it to a "us vs them" thing. I think I am still living in denial in regards to Brexit. I guess I will have to get used to it.
paganel 6y ago
> That said, my sympathy for the EU (as an opponent of Brexit) has been diminished by their attempted bullying behaviour. I'm a EU citizen and I'm with you on this one. Also, I now realise (meaning after Brexit has been actually put in place) that the officials in Bruxelles could have been more forthcoming towards us, the remaining EU citizens, about how UK's exit will effect us. All I was hearing were things like "those dastardly British, they'll pay for it!" while now one cannot receive a package from a relative or close friend in the UK without being flooded with customs forms to fill, to say nothing of the extra money one has to pay for the privilege.
JJzD 6y ago
The argument from EU side is that EU money was also spend across those four sites needed to produce. There was expectation of shared cost and shared resources. Az committed they had no competing contracts, and if any would happen they would be brought up for resolution. So it seems the exclusivity has been claimed twice, both in cost as in rewards. Furthermore on the 8th of December UK taskforce said the first shots were from the continent, so the resources were shared after all, but apparently only one way? About the vaccin buy-in, I never heard that story, but I might be one-sided here. I listened from the Brexit side of the media and the final argument was officially 'they did not receive the email (three times)' The unofficial assumption was that the UK wanted to prove something on their own. This time it worked out, both from securing the vaccins and delivering them. (Good on them, less people dying is a good thing in my book) But the different risk appetite I imagine hard to replicate to the continent, see the German advise for az vaccins above 65. You're right the expected pre production did not happen, and we can talk all year about what happened. And the UK, approving it sooner, but also in a worse situation, could dip in first. The way forward is to find a fair balance in sharing these resources again, until the issues are solved. Maybe by vaccination degree of the vulnerable, maybe by population size, maybe recognising the UK ordered about 2 dosis per capita, and the EU only 1. I heard AZ offered 39 million in q1 and the commission not yet being satisfied. But if we're talking numbers, we can get some way out. I just hope the export ban threat or the article 16 hasn't damaged too much.
kmonad 6y ago
> I didn't foresee a desparate EU attacking a UK just going about it's own business. That's imo a narrative from AZ pitting EU against UK, fueled by a susceptible UK media. US articles on this appear a little more measured. Is the EU attacking the UK? I think they are attacking AZ. It is an utter shame how this is turning political, and there are no excuses for the debacle wrt N. Ireland. Having said this, as I wrote in a different comment, the way I currently understand the situation is that EU demands AZ proportionally reduce fulfillment of orders given their production problems. AZ would thus have to also breach their contract with UK on top of the breach of contract with the EU. AZ pushes the "first come first serve" logic of UK having ordered 3 months sooner, and the UK media, also the left leaning outlets, know that their readers are starved for some news that at least SOMETHING worked in the UK after the recent mess and gobble this narrative up. I don't know if the logic of who orders first gets deliveries first applies in these kind of contracts (IANAL), but I suspect it does not. If it does not, the EU seems to demand something from AZ that they want to avoid, but not attack the UK. I find it extremely hard to navigate the media on this as it is a disgraceful, loaded, dishonest, political shouting match. Instead it should all be about how to best combat the pandemic of course.

senko 6y ago

As a EU citizen, I agree with your assessment completely. The EU bungled this and it would not be fair if we were to bully our way out of it. It's sad to see this being a zero sum game, and no way you cut it people are going to suffer (already are) somewhere. I was expecting a bit more decency on our side. Shattered superiority complex after Brits mismanaged Brexit, maybe? Our lack of coordination and flailing in this regard is equally impressive.

noncoml 6y ago

On the other hand I am a EU citizen married to UK citizen, living in the US, so my skin in the game is mainly emotional. I am not saying EU was/is always right, as they don't seem to be right in this case, but I was just hoping that BBC would be more subtle about it. I am totally fine with UK/AstraZeneca pushing back hard. Just don't see the need for BBC to turn it to a "us vs them" thing. I think I am still living in denial in regards to Brexit. I guess I will have to get used to it.

paganel 6y ago

> That said, my sympathy for the EU (as an opponent of Brexit) has been diminished by their attempted bullying behaviour. I'm a EU citizen and I'm with you on this one. Also, I now realise (meaning after Brexit has been actually put in place) that the officials in Bruxelles could have been more forthcoming towards us, the remaining EU citizens, about how UK's exit will effect us. All I was hearing were things like "those dastardly British, they'll pay for it!" while now one cannot receive a package from a relative or close friend in the UK without being flooded with customs forms to fill, to say nothing of the extra money one has to pay for the privilege.

JJzD 6y ago

The argument from EU side is that EU money was also spend across those four sites needed to produce. There was expectation of shared cost and shared resources. Az committed they had no competing contracts, and if any would happen they would be brought up for resolution. So it seems the exclusivity has been claimed twice, both in cost as in rewards. Furthermore on the 8th of December UK taskforce said the first shots were from the continent, so the resources were shared after all, but apparently only one way? About the vaccin buy-in, I never heard that story, but I might be one-sided here. I listened from the Brexit side of the media and the final argument was officially 'they did not receive the email (three times)' The unofficial assumption was that the UK wanted to prove something on their own. This time it worked out, both from securing the vaccins and delivering them. (Good on them, less people dying is a good thing in my book) But the different risk appetite I imagine hard to replicate to the continent, see the German advise for az vaccins above 65. You're right the expected pre production did not happen, and we can talk all year about what happened. And the UK, approving it sooner, but also in a worse situation, could dip in first. The way forward is to find a fair balance in sharing these resources again, until the issues are solved. Maybe by vaccination degree of the vulnerable, maybe by population size, maybe recognising the UK ordered about 2 dosis per capita, and the EU only 1. I heard AZ offered 39 million in q1 and the commission not yet being satisfied. But if we're talking numbers, we can get some way out. I just hope the export ban threat or the article 16 hasn't damaged too much.

kmonad 6y ago

> I didn't foresee a desparate EU attacking a UK just going about it's own business. That's imo a narrative from AZ pitting EU against UK, fueled by a susceptible UK media. US articles on this appear a little more measured. Is the EU attacking the UK? I think they are attacking AZ. It is an utter shame how this is turning political, and there are no excuses for the debacle wrt N. Ireland. Having said this, as I wrote in a different comment, the way I currently understand the situation is that EU demands AZ proportionally reduce fulfillment of orders given their production problems. AZ would thus have to also breach their contract with UK on top of the breach of contract with the EU. AZ pushes the "first come first serve" logic of UK having ordered 3 months sooner, and the UK media, also the left leaning outlets, know that their readers are starved for some news that at least SOMETHING worked in the UK after the recent mess and gobble this narrative up. I don't know if the logic of who orders first gets deliveries first applies in these kind of contracts (IANAL), but I suspect it does not. If it does not, the EU seems to demand something from AZ that they want to avoid, but not attack the UK. I find it extremely hard to navigate the media on this as it is a disgraceful, loaded, dishonest, political shouting match. Instead it should all be about how to best combat the pandemic of course.