EU Contract With AstraZeneca

Is that how it works though? if a private company manufactures something in a UK factory is that suddenly owned by the UK government who can dictate it doesn't leave the country? Does Boris have ownership of all the cars produced in Sunderland by nissan?
Why are they OUR doses just because they're manufactured here? Surely they are AstraZeneca's doses and only become OURS once the private company hands them over to us as per a contract

 

I do and its disturbing that the EU is failing its citizens, especially the most vulnerable.

The EU is the only organisation accountable for planning and implementing a robust vaccination program for its citizens.

It has failed miserably to do that so far.

There is no conspiracy against the EU. They’ve simply f***ked it up.

 

If something is manufactured in the UK and any organisation (not just the govt) has a contract for that product and it has paid for it, then yes it does own it.

 

And if two organisations have both signed contracts for that product then what? Would you blame the organisation signing the contract or would you criticise the seller for trying to sell it twice?

 

If that’s the case then whichever party has a grievance is entitled to begin legal proceedings.

 

Why is it that you are more than willing to slag off the EU here but whenever it's pointed out how AZ has acted you refuse to comment and just say 'if that's the case they can begin legal proceedings'? Be fair, if you're going to pass judgement on then do the same for the other parties.

The contract that az signed with the EU clearly states that vaccine produced in the UK was included in their contract. If, due to the UK contract, that's not possible what is your opinion on AZ signing a contract it could not fulfill?

 

Fair comment. Like I posted earlier I accept this situation is not likely to change the minds of the overwhelming majority of those who favoured remain and by the same token I am not inclined to gloat or say I told you so. As pointed out all countries need to be safeguarded before this virus is defeated. On that though I have two points . The first country to get back to a relatively normal i.e. pre Pandemic state may well gain an advantage over the stragglers when it comes to economic recovery. Also those worrying that 65% efficacy is inadequate I am sure 60/65% population immune was adequate for herd immunity. In any case the fewer clustered viable hosts the virus can find the more likely it dies before it can jump and replicate. As for certain German media sources quoting 8% efficacy and Macron claiming it does not work on over 65s.whilst adding he has no evidence to support that.....'nuff said!

 

Why are you taking it out on me personally just because I have a different view of the situation to you?

I may be completely wrong. I don’t think I am on many points that I’ve raised or I wouldn’t have raised them.

However, I have said a lot on this thread. I’ve made my points and as such I’m simply just repeating myself now and I’ll leave it here. No one likes a bore.

 

Oh dear.Spouting nonsense again.I see.
Read the link to the interview in La Gazzetta posted by Sadbrewer with AZs CEO. It answers your points. I really cannot work whether you like to take a contrary view and argue for the sake of it to be a WUM, jump in without researching from available sources or are simply stupid .

 

and you know that for sure do you, or are you just hell bent on backing the EU in everything it does?

 

I'm not taking it out on you personally

 

You'll notice the word if mentioned. You'll also notice that I've already said the EU comes out of this extremely poorly

 

I've read it ta. Thanks for the usual post calling me stupid again though, you're becoming quite proficient in that aren't you, it's a shame you mastered calling me stupid much quicker than you mastered wearing a mask

 

I am increasingly convince ST Is a WUM as he is like a dog with a bone and will.argur against anyone an everyone and rarely if ever concedes an argument even in the face of evidence refuting his argument. I don't really think he is stupid but it is a possibility. However I lose patience with him as many threads become overlong given he has to have the last word. I admit I am opinionated but I do concede on occasions when some of the more reasonable posters on here have consensus opposing my PoV.

 

If it walks like a duck quacks...etc. And the old chestnut of masks.. Go and read the original post. I DID and continue to, wear a mask. I also wear it correctly when it is unavoidable to maintain a safe distance. It is only Muppets like you that have changed the narrative and keep dredging it up when you have no answer to the responses to your nonsense. Have you read the CEO interview?

 

Stupid. Muppet. Any more?

 

So you haven't read it then and prefer spend your time deflecting from your inability to respond to challenges to you assertions. The list of appropriate names I could call you is endless but, unlike you, I have better things to do than bandy insults and fill the thread with pointless posts. Bye!

 

I haven't bandied any insult mate, you've done it several times and for some reason keep asking me a question I've already answered and even more bizarrely quoted me answering and still asked again

 

But why even debate/ argue something we don't know for sure.
Its not like arguing football which usual

but why even argue something we have absolutely no idea about, all wee know is AV say one thing and the EU say something else

 

I know but why then is it my post that's picked up on and not the other 7 pages where mom, tekkytyke etc are arguing something we have absolutely no idea about? Why is it deemed ok to put forward their arguments but not to put forward a counter argument which includes evidence from a contract?