[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[Acidbaron]

It is how things work.

I have never had you on ignore - I would never deprive myself of enjoyment reading your posts brings.

It is incredibly naive to think there's no political pressure being used here. Because apparently the shortage is only for one contract. So that it not how these things work.

Glad to be of service, i know how hard it is for a brexiteer in todays britain.

[Lynarii]

The EU contract states nothing of the sort. The UK contract with AZ is neither here nor there, the dispute is between AZ and the EU - what has been agreed with another party, in this case the UK, does not come into it - and the merits of this dispute will hinge on whether AZ are - as claimed - in the breach of the terms of their contract with the EU.

It is possible that it is impossible for AZ to fulfil the terms of the EU contract whilst fulfilling the UK contract (although based on the available evidence this is not the case) in which case it would be for AZ to decide which contract they will breach.

Ultimately, if AZ can fulfill the terms of both of it's contracts then all is well and good. If AZ can not fill them both, then it's not really wrong or evil for both the UK and the EU to demand that their contract be filled, it's on AZ for signing contracts that they couldn't deliver on. I would EXPECT that any government insist on their contract being the one filled if there is a dispute.

My understanding has been, and I may be wrong in this, that the UK is attempting to interfere with AZ's ability to fill their EU contract above and beyond the terms of the UK contract, which is why there is a dispute to begin with.

[Pann]

It is incredibly naive to think there's no political pressure being used here. Because apparently the shortage is only for one contract. So that it not how these things work.

Glad to be of service, i know how hard it is for a brexiteer in todays britain.

I didn't say that there wasn't however what is important is the terms of the contract. The shortage is because of production problems the terms of the contract will determine whether AZ are in breach due to these problems.

Uhm, ok...

- - - Updated - - -

Ultimately, if AZ can fulfill the terms of both of it's contracts then all is well and good. If AZ can not fill them both, then it's not really wrong or evil for both the UK and the EU to demand that their contract be filled, it's on AZ for signing contracts that they couldn't deliver on. I would EXPECT that any government insist on their contract being the one filled if there is a dispute.

My understanding has been, and I may be wrong in this, that the UK is attempting to interfere with AZ's ability to fill their EU contract above and beyond the terms of the UK contract, which is why there is a dispute to begin with.

You're assuming that AZ have signed contracts that they cannot deliver, the contract released today suggests that this is not the case.

Your understanding is wrong. The problem has arisen due to problems setting up production it is nothing to do with the UK.

[Slant]

So what's the issue? AZ are trying to fullfil their order is what the news reports here. If they don't, the EU will enforce the contract immediately by controlling the export. See, this isn't an issue where you can watch the accident happen because you know you can deal about who pays the damages later. The vaccine is going to happen, in the promised amount. That's going to be made a reality. And if people elsewhere don't like it, they can kiss our continental asses and "fine" us later. Welcome to the real world, where someone produces in the territory of the EU and then is surprised that he's in the EU's jurisdiction.

I don't even know why someone on here brings it up as a big contention. It's ridiculous to even discuss this.

[Easo]

Slant, I think it is pretty clear right now that no, vaccines will not happen in the promised amount during the time frame they were planned to. First quarter of the year has been lost. Of course, at later time we will receive everything ordered, but not now.

[Lynarii]

I didn't say that there wasn't however what is important is the terms of the contract. The shortage is because of production problems the terms of the contract will determine whether AZ are in breach due to these problems.

Uhm, ok...

- - - Updated - - -



You're assuming that AZ have signed contracts that they cannot deliver, the contract released today suggests that this is not the case.

Your understanding is wrong. The problem has arisen due to problems setting up production it is nothing to do with the UK.

I'm not assuming that, my very first sentence that you quoted was "Ultimately, if AZ can fulfill the terms of both of it's contracts then all is well and good." But this was brought up in this thread as an example of the evil EU stealing from the innocent UK, and frankly the reasoning used to justify that position (that the date a contract was signed is more significant than the content of the contract) was garbage. The talk about the content of the UK contract is mostly discussion of possible scenarios where that read on the situation would be accurate, the alternate take being 'this is a potentially moot issue of contract details, and sircaw is trying to use it for propaganda'.

[Pann]

I'm not assuming that, my very first sentence that you quoted was "Ultimately, if AZ can fulfill the terms of both of it's contracts then all is well and good." But this was brought up in this thread as an example of the evil EU stealing from the innocent UK, and frankly the reasoning used to justify that position (that the date a contract was signed is more significant than the content of the contract) was garbage. The talk about the content of the UK contract is mostly discussion of possible scenarios where that read on the situation would be accurate, the alternate take being 'this is a potentially moot issue of contract details, and sircaw is trying to use it for propaganda'.

AZ can fulfil their contract to the EU as it very clearly states - multiple times - in the contract that it will make the best reasonable efforts to deliver x many doses by y date. The Commission has decided that this is not the case and has demanded that doses that have been manufactured as part of the AZ/UK contract be diverted from the UK to the EU.

The date of the signing of the contract is important in so much as the ramp up time available from beginning to create a supply chain to delivering the doses. The UK supply chain went through similar issues to the ones being experienced in the EU but with the contract being signed three months earlier AZ had three months extra lead time to rectify these issues. The fact the UK signed a contract before the EU would also mean that the EU was aware that AZ already had contractual obligations to the UK at the time of agreeing the contract with them.

Talk of the UK contract is nonsense it has nothing to do with what AZ agreed with the EU.

[Kronik85]

This is a major problem, the EU is trying to steal supplies that have already been ordered and paid for by the British government.

There is no theft here. Unless the EU is raiding stocks already purchased or laying claim to them then this is not a matter of theft but a matter of supply and Astra Zeneca having to make a choice over which party to supply. It is going to piss of one of its customers either way but that's an issue for Astra Zeneca not the UK Gov.

Imagine supplies being taken away from people in the UK, imagine people dying in the UK because of the incompetence of the Eu and them stopping supplies from reaching the UK.

The only people to blame here are the Eu, they signed their contracts late.

You understand that I view lives being saved in the UK with as much weight as lives anywhere else in the world right? I don't value the lives of my fellow countrymen more than dirty foreigners and you get that watching Tories and right wing pundits crowing "nernernernerner we've got the vaccine" is fucking disgusting right?

This situation sucks, it's ugly but sadly inevitable, I only wish the politicians that represent me had some bloody decorum rather than trying to sell this as a win for Brexit when we could have approved the vaccine earlier than the rest of the EU even if we were still in it.

Also while I'm throwing shade I've been following this article 16 shit from the EU side and that's also shameful stuff from our EU counterparts. So GJ, now we are all covered in shit.

[jonnysensible]

eu has shitty vaccine procurement planning. pulls out article 16. This is basically what the WA move was for the UK. Bad planning = dumb misdirection threat.

very stupid

[Forogil]

eu has shitty vaccine procurement planning. pulls out article 16. This is basically what the WA move was for the UK. Bad planning = dumb misdirection threat.

The EU procurement was more focused on reducing costs and ensuring safety-guarantees than some others.

We will see how it actually turns out in the end, since only Israel has so far managed to give 50% one dose - and Israel is neither in the EU nor part of the uk.

[LeGin Tufnel]

Agree completely with Kronik

Vaccine nationalism at it's finest.

Well done, all.

But what do we expect with fucking Sircaw:

This is a major problem, the EU is trying to steal supplies that have already been ordered and paid for by the British government.

Go fuck yourself, you troll cunt.

Why the fuck hasn't this been infracted?

Does it really take me steaming in calling the guy a cunt to get us both infracted?

Jesus fucking christ.
[Infraction]

[Crispin]

And here you are siding with the Eu, The British contract has nothing, fuck all to do with the Eu.

What on earth does a contract dispute between the EU and AstraZeneca have to do with Brexit? You're in the wrong thread, unless your point is "SEE EU IS NOT PERFECT!", which we all already know, and still is completely besides the point.

[Easo]

EU has backtracked on the article 16.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55865539

[Xarkan]

EU has backtracked on the article 16.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55865539

Probably for the best

[On a slightly bigger note for the whole mess in general:]

If AstraZeneca is breaching contract then that would not be the UK's fault

I'd rather the EU in such a situation sued the company than punish its customers (Well maybe if the customer was north korea i guess)

[Slant]

Slant, I think it is pretty clear right now that no, vaccines will not happen in the promised amount during the time frame they were planned to. First quarter of the year has been lost. Of course, at later time we will receive everything ordered, but not now.

Yes, well, I think it's fair to say that the planet is seeing the biggest rush to vaccinate since Polio. We'll get it in time, until then it is quite possible to keep going as we are and be patient. Or to steal that spanish advert's slogan... "Be patient or be a patient."

- - - Updated - - -

Probably for the best

[On a slightly bigger note for the whole mess in general:]

If AstraZeneca is breaching contract then that would not be the UK's fault

I'd rather the EU in such a situation sued the company than punish its customers (Well maybe if the customer was north korea i guess)

This is one of the situations where suing won't help anyone. Nobody's interested in punitive damages being paid when lives can still be saved. Having said that, I'm ok with this for the same reason.

[Acidbaron]

EU has backtracked on the article 16.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55865539

But;

Despite later backtracking on Article 16, the EU is still introducing new controls giving its member states the power to block exports of the coronavirus vaccine to countries including the UK - should they want to.

The statement from the European Commission said, in order to tackle "the current lack of transparency" over vaccine exports outside the EU, it would be introducing a measure requiring that all such exports "are subject to an authorisation" by member states.

AZ is also at fault here with not being transparent enough, in any case this is a precursor for how things will happen now. The UK will be on the receiving end of the world giants. What means they are vulnerable to their good will.

[Crispin]

Well I agree that the issue is between the EU and AZ, not EU - AZ - UK.

Either way, I'd prefere we get some of our money back, if AZ does not live up to the contract. Never expected the EU to receive vaccines en mass. There's no doubt that the EU could have acted faster, but I guess that's the disadvantage of being a huge ship with so many captains.

[Acidbaron]

Well I agree that the issue is between the EU and AZ, not EU - AZ - UK.

Either way, I'd prefere we get some of our money back, if AZ does not live up to the contract. Never expected the EU to receive vaccines en mass. There's no doubt that the EU could have acted faster, but I guess that's the disadvantage of being a huge ship with so many captains.

Acting faster in comparison to who? I mean if we are comparing it to the UK than yes BUT the reason the EU was slower was because the EU wanted to test these vaccines more, because people were worried and governments were worried and governments are taking part of the responsibility from the Big Pharma companies because that was a requirement of them to fast track this procedure.

People need to understand that the UK government took a gamble and luckily for the UK citizens it worked out in their favour but it also could not have.

God forbid it didn't but with all the scepticisms surrounding vaccines, can you imagine the negative impact this gamble from the UK could have had for everyone if the vaccine had actual severe and bad side effects and not just these negative effects on the second dose that is being looked into? So i am pleased it turned out well but suddenly claiming the EU acted too slow and the UK acted correctly and showed good leadership, i mean like what? Did we all just forget the last few years of how they dealt with their Brexit and still continue to do?

The attention span of people in today's rapid news age is really short.

[LeGin Tufnel]

Apologies for my language last night… had had an awful day. Also apologies to @Rozz for not giving enough time between reporting and going off on one.

Zero apologies to Sircaw other than for the language. The poster has been given multiple opportunities to present valid arguments and has failed to do so every time, engaging in a constant circle of evasion and sea-lioning. I’m not going to engage with them further.

The issue (the EU in conflict with a British-Swedish multinational) had nothing to do with Brexit. All of this should have been in the Covid thread.

However:

The UK will be on the receiving end of the world giants. What means they are vulnerable to their good will.

Don’t you mean “ill will”?

Why on earth did the EU trigger NIP Article 16 clause yesterday. A shocking misjudgement and has been widely condemned around the globe, not just by London, Belfast & Dublin. The immediate u-turn, hours after the announcement, is indicative of how poorly-judged it was. From a body that has, rightly, been banging on about the importance of respecting the Irish Protocol. Dreadful hypocrisy.

a) As far as I understand it the EU’s procurement process has been slow.

b) The EMA’s vaccine approval process has been equally slow, for some valid data set reasons.

As a result, vaccination roll-out has been slow and EU citizens and national governments are frustrated.

It is very clear that senior EU politicians (in both the commission and at a national level) are trying to deflect some of this frustration by turning the AstraZeneca issue into some sort of Brexit / UK-related scapegoat.

Some of the language used has been, frankly, unbelievable.

Macron:

Today we think that it [AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine] is quasi-ineffective for people over 65

This is a categorical misrepresentation of the actual truth. There’s no point going into in this thread. Google it.

Honestly? I’m shocked by how some politicians on the continent have behaved in recent days. And that comes from someone who’s generally been embarrassed about the behaviour of the UK’s politicians.

The vaccine is going to happen, in the promised amount. That's going to be made a reality. And if people elsewhere don't like it, they can kiss our continental asses and "fine" us later. Welcome to the real world, where someone produces in the territory of the EU and then is surprised that he's in the EU's jurisdiction.

That’s bizarre, Slant. It’s just petulant foot-stamping. No, the EU will not receive the doses in the promised amount. That’s now impossible. What do you gain by stating this?

This whole thing is colossal shit show. Vaccine nationalism is bringing out the worst in everyone. Do not try and take a moral high ground here. Feel sympathy for the poor fuckers in the developing world who will receive vaccines last, if at all.

Personally? I’d be willing to forgo my vaccine so that a key worker in another country (any not just the EU) could receive theirs. It’s an entirely separate issue but as a society we should not be prioritising the vaccination of the elderly over and above key workers as has been the case in the UK.

[Forogil]

Personally? I’d be willing to forgo my vaccine so that a key worker in another country (any not just the EU) could receive theirs. It’s an entirely separate issue but as a society we should not be prioritising the vaccination of the elderly over and above key workers as has been the case in the UK.

I disagree. Obviously there might be cases where key workers are so essential that we need to vaccinate them to keep society going in the short-run - especially if we don't have backups - such as emergency personnel.

However, the list of key workers in the uk includes lots of other occupations that are less essential. If the choice is between vaccinating the priests/government officials in charge of coviid/clerks at food-markets or the elderly I would vaccinate the elderly 100% - as they have severe risk dying.