EU Contract With AstraZeneca

Wouldn’t disagree with any of that, I’m just saying the EU could have handled the situation different to achieve their own aims(if the stories coming out are true about Eu first for vaccines).

 

From where we are, the EU has, largely due to the bureaucracy and centralisation-often regarded by many as a benefit of the EU -become cumbersome and unwieldy when rapid decisions and actions are necessary. This pandemic has exposed that major failing....
..those that clamour for 'decentralisation' of Govt (e.g. the SNP) and devolve power and decision making are also those quick to praise and eager to join an organisation that does the exact opposite by adding another layer of bureaucracy (plus costs and delays ) to the decision making process.

 

You say that but many European countries reacted much much quicker to this virus than the UK. Weren't we famously behind everyone else in reacting at all?

 

Italy was the first to be overrun with it and whilst they quarantined the main hotspot it was too late and spread rapidly across the country. So no, not really. The cross borders are still open now and flights in and out continued unabated. EDIT: We are talking about the EU organisation not individual states within the EU that you are referring to.

 

I think its easy to say social media is to blame. Behind social media are people, being social. But also groups intent on sowing disinformation and hate. Social media is merely a platform, it's people that fill it with content.

What I do believe is social media has allowed people to be more of themselves. That things they would feel they couldn't say to someones face, they can say via partial anonymity. And what the technology obviously allows, and even encourages is to create bubbles of the same.

So now it's much easier to create a bubble, a network of self reinforcing information on loop of any given topic that is completely false.

I also think that there has always been an adversarial nature in the UK. Whether thats in our DNA, or its a more recent thing, but we seem to love an opposite. There's always an enemy, and the media seem to thrive off that, and our current governors even moreso.

I hope that changes and swiftly, and more balance is achieved. Sadly, I'm not sure how that can happen with the current incumbents, and my suspicion is it will get much much worse before it gets better.

 

It's amazing that even the BBC worldwide service is more politically neutral. It's going to get worse here too as 2 far right news channels get launched.

I'd even say the Guardian has been more infiltrated by right wing and far left sources and certainly isn't a pro European panacea.

 

If the BBC is a pro EU platform, then goodness me, I'd hate to see what is anti EU. The BBC, and Sky give platforms to some of the most crazed people in our country. And when they run out of those, they turn to the US for an amplified version.

Starkey, Phillips, Farage, Griffin, Oakeshott, Tice, Hitchens were regularly on BBCQT for years and the balance of news editorial and chair of the organisation is long gone with repeated conservatives filling all positions of power and decision making.

Its a sad indictment that through the BBCs fall from grace and its misunderstanding of balance and giving excessive airtime to unsavoury individuals, combined with its increasing lack of forensic questioning when doing so, I would rather watch Sky news for a more impartial assessment.... which clearly, it isn't either.

I watched the brexit podcast a handful of times, and there was no way at all you could interpret that as a balanced view. Several instances the presenters referred to "remoaners" while remaining largely silent on the calibre of UK government efforts.

Thankfully not all of the BBC reporters fall into that category, but there are sadly far too many who look more like a state mouthpiece. And when someone does try and highlight government incompetence, the hypocrisy and downright blatant lies... like Emily Maitlis did on Newsnight some time ago, they are removed from the airwaves with a public apology from the tory paymaster overseeing the BBC.

You're completely entitled to your view of the BBC, but it doesn't echo of what i see of it on a moderately regular basis.

 

All I’m going to say on this.

If the tables were turned, and our Government was 3 months behind and trying to blockade stocks to Europe...

There would be a call for heads on sticks here....

 

Absolutely. This is worrying as well....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/29/bnp-non-white-britons-resettlement-grants

The link is from eleven years ago when the British National Party wanted to pay people to go back to their homeland and leave the UK. Yesterday it came out that the EU want to pay their citizens £2000 to leave the UK to go back to their homeland. In no circumstances should something thought up by Nick Griffin be the way to go about business. They also now want to stop Pfizer sending their vaccine here to save millions of UK lives.....

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-acces...ew-controls-on-covid-vaccine-exports-12198979

 

Erm... this link is from yesterday. EU citizens are being offered money, not the EU offering, it's the UK government trying and get rid of them! Please be accurate with your reporting.

EU citizens offered financial incentives to leave UK | Brexit | The Guardian

 

Germany have just announced that there's insufficient data for the efficacy of the AstraZenica vaccine in Over 65s, so they are going to limit it to those aged 18 to 64.

 

Absolutely.

However, due to the way it was approved (under EU Emergency authorisation rules) the UK government are on the hook for any liability arising from side-effects or other issues that crops up with anyone that has been vaccinated using any of the vaccines. Hopefully, this isn't an issue, but *if* there is a problem it could leave the government with a big financial problem. The EU countries, by waiting for EMA approval, put the liability on the pharmaceutical company supplying the vaccine.

IIRC Hungary has used the same method to approve the Russian Sputnik vaccine for use in that country.

Whatever the situation is with the contract, it will probably end up in court - and it could see AZ in a lot of trouble if they lose. Unfortunately, people are dying while this is sorted out and that isn't something that should be gloated over.

 

Well, they won't need to worry about supply then.

 

Apparently the EU have ordered spot checks on AstraZeneca’s Belgian plant. How petty can you get? They’ve f’ucked up, everyone else is to blame. They haven’t even approved it for use yet.

 

The EU want to protect the most vulnerable first which is the right thing to do, but those people are in the age bracket they won't give the AZ vaccine to, so I don't see why they want it now if they don't plan to use it for people just yet. Our government have made so many mistakes it's hard to keep up, but the vaccine success story of going alone continues to gather pace. 89% efficient and over a quarter of the people in the trial were elderly. To have another sixty million of a different type of vaccine made in the UK would be a success to match the AZ one.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...oronavirus-vaccine-is-89-3-effective-12201756

 

A long interview in Italy's La Repubblica with Pascal Soriot, CEO of Astra Zenecca.
The critical part around the EU contract are the words 'best effort'....Sorry I can't just find the link again but it appeared in the German press that AZ told Stella Kyriakides that due to the late nature of the Commission's interest, AZ could not sign a contract to deliver the numbers they wanted, SK then asked for the words 'best effort' to be inserted so she could present it as a signed deal...had AZ managed to hit the headline numbers, no one would have been any the wiser that the 'contract' was actually a wishlist.

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2...azeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/

 

What this proves to me is that it is easier as a single nation (uk &Ni) to make decisions (good or bad) than a massive conglomerate who have so many members with differing views or stances that it takes too long to process any meaningful decisions hence they are 3 to 4 months behind us on the vaccine. Without getting into the brexit debate the main reason I lost faith was when the incredibly sensible idea of a group of self governing states agreed to trade with each other without red tape or tax(The common market) became the EU where the decision making and control of the land (good or bad) was taken out of my hands as Blair and the gnomes of Brussels tried to create a "United states of Europe" Therefore if I as a nation elect Bojo or whoever I only have myself to blame if they get it wrong, but I do have the option in 5 years time to correct it. With Eu we left i had 1/28 say and very little chance of affecting who was governing and it was clear to see the Franco - German axis was the major influence in the alliance.

Hence the German and French reluctance to agree and approve the vaccine has cost the smaller states the option to chose at the time, had we still been members that would have included us. Which is why in general I support our current position where we can make major decision quickly ( sometimes wrong!!) on our own but still in general trade freely with the continent but also develop other markets around the world.

Just as a side point Jimmy Krankie in Scotland is complaining about being made to leave a large conglomerate of countries but see's her sole focus as promoting leaving a conglomerate of countries strange?

 

What I find more strange is why English nationalists want to continually make sly digs at Scotland and deny them their democratic right. Or is ‘sovereignty’ only the domain of England? Is there really need for the name calling of the Scottish leader? Her name is Nicola Sturgeon. Please use it.

 

Yes, we must have the upmost respect for Nicola. As she does everyone else.

My Sworn Evidence on the Sturgeon Affair - Craig Murray