Coronavirus

[Nearly Sane]

...
Note that, until today, the EU couldn't do anything with the AstraZenica vaccine because, only today will it be approved in the EU.

And won't be recommended for over 65s in Germany

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9197521/Germanys-vaccine-commission-says-AstraZeneca-jab-used-65s.html

[ProfessorDavey]

All of this is just hypothesis unless you have sight of the relevant contracts.

If the EU contract says "vaccine to be supplied from the plants in Belgium and the Netherlands" then the EU doesn't have a leg to stand on in this dispute. If, on the other hand, the British plant is included in the contract, then AstraZenica can't just say "sorry EU", they must make a commercial decision about how to resolve the issue.  It's likely that both their UK and EU contracts have penalty clauses which come into effect in the event of failure to commit to delivering contracted vaccines. So those will inform AstraZenica's decision.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55852698

The CEO of AstraZenica said that:

If he is right and if the British contract does stipulate a timetable, the UK must get priority.

It's a horrible mess because, in a ideal world, we would all be sat round a table discussing how to resolve the shortage in a way that is fair to everybody, but political squabbles are clearly getting in the way.

Note that, until today, the EU couldn't do anything with the AstraZenica vaccine because, only today will it be approved in the EU.

I gather from comment on the news that the AZ contract with the EU mentions four production sites, two of which are in the UK.

I doubt that the AZ contract with the UK would be substantially different to that with the EU in terms of 'best efforts'.

[jeremyp]

I gather from comment on the news that the AZ contract with the EU mentions four production sites, two of which are in the UK.

It's all just speculation unless these people have seen the contract and even if true, it doesn't necessarily mean they have to use the UK sites. The contract might say (as an example, obviously, I haven't seen it either) "the contract will be fulfilled from site e and u and AstraZenica may use sites g and b to make up any shortfall". In that case, AstraZenica are not obligated to fulfil EU orders from Great Britain. Change "may" to "must" and it's a different story.

I doubt that the AZ contract with the UK would be substantially different to that with the EU in terms of 'best efforts'.

That's just speculation too. There's only one group of people that have full knowledge of both contracts and they seem to be of the opinion that AstraZenica's best interests are served by throttling EU supplies but not UK supplies.

As an aside, the contracts manager of the first company I worked in said "never sign a contract that commits you to 'best efforts'". He would always insist on it being replaced with "reasonable efforts" because the former commits you to fixing everything even at the cost of bankrupting the company.

[Udayana]

APA - AstraZenaca:

...

5.4 Manufacturing sites AstraZenaca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which for the purposes of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) and may manufacture the Vaccine in non-EU facilities, ...

 

Although they have published (redacted) the contract it can be argued for years with no useful result.

VDL's statements are escalating the situation rather than resolving the issue. If it keeps on along this path it is possible for all vaccine production in the UK and EU to grind to a halt.

Let's hope BJ can resist joining in and sticks to the relatively diplomatic language used so far.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's all just speculation unless these people have seen the contract and even if true, it doesn't necessarily mean they have to use the UK sites. The contract might say (as an example, obviously, I haven't seen it either) "the contract will be fulfilled from site e and u and AstraZenica may use sites g and b to make up any shortfall". In that case, AstraZenica are not obligated to fulfil EU orders from Great Britain. Change "may" to "must" and it's a different story.5.4 Manufacturing sites AstraZenaca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which for the purposes of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) and may manufacture the Vaccine in non-EU facilities, ...

5.4 Manufacturing sites AstraZenaca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which for the purposes of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) and may manufacture the Vaccine in non-EU facilities, ...

That seems pretty clear that the UK manufacturing sites are treated in exactly the same way as the EU sites in terms of their obligation to deliver the vaccines the EU ordered.

[ProfessorDavey]

As an aside, the contracts manager of the first company I worked in said "never sign a contract that commits you to 'best efforts'". He would always insist on it being replaced with "reasonable efforts" because the former commits you to fixing everything even at the cost of bankrupting the company.

It would appear the contract uses the term Best Reasonable Efforts.

[Aruntraveller]

That seems pretty clear that the UK manufacturing sites are treated in exactly the same way as the EU sites in terms of their obligation to deliver the vaccines the EU ordered.

It would be interesting to see what the UK contract specifies.

[ProfessorDavey]

It would be interesting to see what the UK contract specifies.

It would indeed, but I doubt it will be markedly different in terms of wording and obligations to deliver.

What would be interesting is to know what would have happened if it had been the UK manufacturing facilities that had hit some issues rather than the EU ones. Would we simply see the same argument in reverse - in other words the UK demanding vaccines from the EU plants to make up for the shortfall in UK production.

Of course the solution here is to solve the production issues and production capacity to ensure that AZ can meet its obligations to both the UK and EU, and the UK and EU both get the vaccines they have ordered in the timeframe specified in their contracts.

[Udayana]

It would indeed, but I doubt it will be markedly different in terms of wording and obligations to deliver.

The UK has already made clear it will not allow the contract to be published. And there have been remarks indicating that the considerable funding required to establish the plants was provided only on the condition that the UK demand would be met before non-UK.

What would be interesting is to know what would have happened if it had been the UK manufacturing facilities that had hit some issues rather than the EU ones. Would we simply see the same argument in reverse - in other words the UK demanding vaccines from the EU plants to make up for the shortfall in UK production.

Is anyone in a position to guarantee that the UK yield can remain at its current level? I doubt it. I'd speculate that with careful work and, possibly, further funding it is possible for the EU yields to be boosted, or at least further plants brought in to ensure better supply.

It could be noted that EU funding for development and production for covid vaccines has been far below that of the UK and USA.
 

Of course the solution here is to solve the production issues and production capacity to ensure that AZ can meet its obligations to both the UK and EU, and the UK and EU both get the vaccines they have ordered in the timeframe specified in their contracts.

Indeed.

[ProfessorDavey]

The UK has already made clear it will not allow the contract to be published. And there have been remarks indicating that the considerable funding required to establish the plants was provided only on the condition that the UK demand would be met before non-UK.

Even if that is true, and you should note that the EU also put funding into the development of the manufacturing facilities in the UK, then a further question arises. Were the EU made aware of this contractual arrangement when they signed with AZ. If not then there are questions about the equivalence on the EU and UK production facilities mentioned in their contract. If the UK had to be serviced first then there cannot be an equivalence in terms of best reasonable efforts to supply from the various facilities.

It could be noted that EU funding for development and production for covid vaccines has been far below that of the UK and USA.

True - but then presumably the EU had put more funding into vaccine production facilities as they already had facilities in place, while the UK had little production facility at the outset.

But there is a further point - in a vaccine development which involves both private and public funding (as these do) there will be financial benefit coming back to both the private and public bodies. So presumably, for example, funding will flow back into Oxford University for every vaccine sold, and potentially directly back to funder organisations. So while the UK may be paying the same as the EU for an AZ vaccine, there may be differences in terms of returned financial compensation depending on the origin of the R&D from which the vaccine was derived.

[Nearly Sane]

Marina Hyde on vaccine wars, and Desmond Swayne.


https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/29/nationalism-vaccine-mutation-uk-eu?__twitter_impression=true

[ad_orientem]

Marina Hyde on vaccine wars, and Desmond Swayne.


https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/29/nationalism-vaccine-mutation-uk-eu?__twitter_impression=true

 

I rather liked her bit on Desmond Swayne.Hiw such a person becomes an MP I'll never know.

[Nearly Sane]

 

I rather liked her bit on Desmond Swayne.Hiw such a person becomes an MP I'll never know.

I believe he is SusanDoris's MP.

[SusanDoris]

I believe he is SusanDoris's MP.

I've read the Guardian link and that sort of damning article by a very anti-conservative is not for me.
I will reserve judgement until I see his blog for this week.

[Nearly Sane]

EU continue to flail about


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-55860540?__twitter_impression=true

[Nearly Sane]

I've read the Guardian link and that sort of damning article by a very anti-conservative is not for me.
I will reserve judgement until I see his blog for this week.

I don't think Michael Gove is very anti-conservative.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9194989/Tory-MP-Swayne-accused-spreading-dangerous-misinformation-Covid.html

[ProfessorDavey]

EU continue to flail about


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-55860540?__twitter_impression=true

Bad news for the UK, but completely understandable. Frankly if the UK feels they should have first dibs on vaccines made in the UK, then it is hardly surprising (nor unreasonable) for the EU to feel they should have first dibs on vaccines made in the EU.

[Nearly Sane]

Bad news for the UK, but completely understandable. Frankly if the UK feels they should have first dibs on vaccines made in the UK, then it is hardly surprising (nor unreasonable) for the EU to feel they should have first dibs on vaccines made in the EU.

And quite possibly creating a border in Ireland jeopardising the Good Friday agreement and handing a huge boost to Brexit and Johnson

[Nearly Sane]

Meanwhile the country that has vaccinated the largest percentage of its population in the last 3 days is Serbia. In the queue to join the EU but has bought the Chinese vaccine and is jagging everyone it can.

[Aruntraveller]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/29/eu-moves-to-stop-northern-ireland-being-used-as-a-vaccine-backdoor-to-britain

More buggery bollocks from the EU.

This is outrageous. If they want us all to become Brexiteers they are doing a sterling job.

[Aruntraveller]

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/it-s-hard-to-see-how-the-eu-can-win-a-case-against-astrazeneca

Interesting article about the legal side of the vaccine debacle.

The clause 6.2 would seem to be an important clause to me - but I'm not an expert on legal matters in any way whatsoever. Does anyone on here have more expertise?

[Udayana]

Phew.. Back from the brink at least, but damage to be assessed...

[Nearly Sane]

Phew.. Back from the brink at least, but damage to be assessed...

Quite a lot given the widespread condemnation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55865539

[Udayana]

Quite a lot given the widespread condemnation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55865539

I'm finding it difficult to understand how they could bypass all their normal procedures and make such a "mistake", undermining confidence in everything agreed over the last four years. Who made or approved the decision? - I'd expect calls for von der Leyen to go.

The idea that the Commission is now "giving its member states the power - should they want to - to block exports of the coronavirus vaccine" (to non-EU countries) also seems dubious. Not sure why member states would need to be given the power to do this, rather than already be able to act independently?

Of-course, in general, vaccine export bans are bad anyway, - as per the WHO.

[SusanDoris]

Re Sir Desmond Swayne
NFW members have been sent quite a long letter. Latest blog not on line yet. There is one section which I willl quote when I have seen latest blog. He does not lie, and I have no reason to believe that he has done so in his letter even though I have read it only once so far.