UK Politics: Oh Ambassador you are really spoiling us!

[SeanF]

58 minutes ago, Padraig said:

On both sides.   Wouldn't you be very embarrassed if you were one of the teams of lawyers who put in a clause that X was supposed to ensure supply from sites in Y and Z.  And then somebody months later said, "haha...X has no power over Z".

Unless you are a legal expert, I am a little dubious that you, on your own, can fix this multi billion euro contract.  No offense.

As HoI pointed out, the legal experts are giving their views now.  I'm going to wait for a few more beyond I comment.

None taken.  I have no experience of drafting contracts involving Big Pharma, but I have drafted hundreds of contracts of all sorts, and many of the principles are general.

If you’re being paid £750 an hour to get it right, it’s never your fault, but the fault of those who failed to instruct you properly

[Heartofice]

So in what the DUP have described as an incredible act of hostility the EU have effectively created a border in Ireland ( oh the irony) to control vaccines getting into Northern Ireland.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55864442
 

With Macrons latest comments, the EU is looking worse and worse by the day here. 

[JoannaL]

I really have considered if I should answer you, also because I do think the AZ row should be between the company and the customers and nothing else (and definitly not a UK against EU thing). But I want you to consider only for a moment the outside view:

There is a pandemic. Everyone is suffering.  In one region of the world (lets call it region A) there is a plant (lets call it Biontech) which makes vaccine for  a lot of customers. This plant has a supply problem. the company then reduces the shares according to the orders.  Does region A then say, ok we keep our supplies first, the rest of the world has a problem now, sorry. No, region A agreed to a fair share of burden of the supply problem. Then a different company (lets call it AZ), which has plants in region A and region B gets a supply problem. The problem is in a factory in region A.  In the past shipping between region A and region B was not a problem and supply of the precious vaccine also went from region A to region B. But the company argues now without legal ground that the burden this time will not be shared fairly , that only the region A should suffer, without taking into account the plants in region B. Shouldnt region A be angry now? Should it not demand that the contract be fulfilled. Shouldnt region A become  more wary now of the supply chains which leaves its territory?

[Heartofice]

9 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

I really have considered if I should answer you, also because I do think the AZ row should be between the company and the customers and nothing else (and definitly not a UK against EU thing). But I want you to consider only for a moment the outside view:

Well I do agree with this, but then the EU has just placed a border down Ireland less than a month after Brexit. That doesn't look like someone wanting to keep things between the company and the customer. 

Anyway, whatever the legalities of the situation, and I'm not sure any of us know who is really in the right here, I do think a lot of this is the EU trying to cover the problems that it has partly created, and it is a very serious PR disaster for them. Brexit Britain surging ahead of them in vaccinations is bad enough, especially when it seems to have been able to do so for some of the very reasons many claimed were reasons for Brexit, but then singling out the UK like this is pretty eye opening. 

 

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

So in what the DUP have described as an incredible act of hostility the EU have effectively created a border in Ireland ( oh the irony) to control vaccines getting into Northern Ireland.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55864442
 

With Macrons latest comments, the EU is looking worse and worse by the day here. 

It is an act of remarkable bad faith on their part.  Fortunately, NI will be getting the necessary vaccines from the Mainland.  So far, the EU has united the DUP, SDLP, Labour, and the British and Irish governments in opposition.

[john]

I don’t really want to be seen to be more on one side than the other on this, but the fact is the EU are legally able to do this, on the grounds that vaccine movement out of the bloc will create “serious societal problems” the same way that AZ are legally able to claim that a “best effort” of less than a quarter of the promised product fulfils their contractual obligations.

Neither of these sound particularly sound claims to me.

[Werthead]

56 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

There is a pandemic. Everyone is suffering.  In one region of the world (lets call it region A) there is a plant (lets call it Biontech) which makes vaccine for  a lot of customers. This plant has a supply problem. the company then reduces the shares according to the orders.  Does region A then say, ok we keep our supplies first, the rest of the world has a problem now, sorry. No, region A agreed to a fair share of burden of the supply problem. Then a different company (lets call it AZ), which has plants in region A and region B gets a supply problem. The problem is in a factory in region A.  In the past shipping between region A and region B was not a problem and supply of the precious vaccine also went from region A to region B. But the company argues now without legal ground that the burden this time will not be shared fairly , that only the region A should suffer, without taking into account the plants in region B. Shouldnt region A be angry now? Should it not demand that the contract be fulfilled. Shouldnt region A become  more wary now of the supply chains which leaves its territory?

As a totally theoretical argument, this is a reasonable question, but it also has to acknowledge that Region B is suffering considerably more badly from the pandemic than any comparable area in Region A, with a vastly higher death rate and infection rate, either taking into account individual areas or the average of the bloc as a whole (which is dramatically lower because some area in Region A really have their shit together and others do not, albeit none of them have lost their shit as much as Region B).

This argument therefore doesn't really work out. If Region B was doing much better than Region A and could divert resources of help Region A they would do so. But they are, in fact, doing much worse.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

I don’t quite get the reason why the EU has now brought in a customs border. Are they actually facing issues where vaccine producers are are trying to export to outside EU countries? Obviously the whole AstraZeneca thing is about tying to get more vaccines into the bloc. Is this just symbolic? Seems like a very unnecessary measure, if there aren’t any vaccines crossing from Ireland into NI anyway.

[Padraig]

16 minutes ago, Stannis Eats No Peaches said:

I don’t quite get the reason why the EU has now brought in a customs border. Are they actually facing issues where vaccine producers are are trying to export to outside EU countries? Obviously the whole AstraZeneca thing is about tying to get more vaccines into the bloc. Is this just symbolic? Seems like a very unnecessary measure, if there aren’t any vaccines crossing from Ireland into NI anyway.

Its the principle.  This has 0 impact on actual distribution (as far as I can tell).  But the EU is clearly really annoyed with what AZ has done.  Nothing will get into the UK whatever their knowledge.

And just to be clear, the customs border only applies to the vaccine.

[Werthead]

It's introducing a political angle to a discussion which was, up until now, a business and legal-based one centred on what the AZ contracts with the EU said. But suddenly imposing the border will creating a political division which the British, Northern Irish and Republic government now have to get involved with.

You can also imagine the horror on the US ambassador's face (as the USA are the guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement) because whilst there is stuff in the GFA about a hard border being imposed on the island by order of either the British or Irish governments, I don't think it covers what happens if the EU suddenly decides to slam one down (I imagine they'll have to take it as the Republic as a member of the EU doing it, unless the Republic refuses to comply).

The principle thing is fine, but it's creating a legal and diplomatic nightmare where one does not need to exist.

[Pebble thats Stubby]

14 minutes ago, Stannis Eats No Peaches said:

I don’t quite get the reason why the EU has now brought in a customs border. Are they actually facing issues where vaccine producers are are trying to export to outside EU countries? Obviously the whole AstraZeneca thing is about tying to get more vaccines into the bloc. Is this just symbolic? Seems like a very unnecessary measure, if there aren’t any vaccines crossing from Ireland into NI anyway.

I suspect its a bit symbolic as any customs boarder makes things harder on NI, when there is already extra difficulties with a boarder in the Irish sea.  This puts pressure on the UK government to tell AstraZeneca  "hey its ok if you give the EU some of the vaccine made in the here"  Not sure this works of course since the Westminster government rarely gives any fucks about NI, and this plays very favourably with the Brexit crowd with the EU being evil and unreasonable bullies.

 

Also I believe the Pfizer vaccine is not made in the UK but the EU so there a boarder and customs controls stopping that getting here will have an effect.  I guess it really depends how much Pfizer we get and how much AV the EU want in return for letting us have some Pfizer.

 

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, Padraig said:

Its the principle.  This has 0 impact on actual distribution (as far as I can tell).  But the EU is clearly really annoyed with what AZ has done.  Nothing will get into the UK whatever their knowledge.

And just to be clear, the customs border only applies to the vaccine.

I don’t understand what principle this is trying to prove? How is creating a border in Ireland , something the EU has spent the last few years ‘attempting’ to prevent, proving a point to AZ? 
 

I don’t think I understand what is to be gained here. The claims I’ve seen is that the EU wants to prevent uncontrolled vaccines getting into the UK, which seems rather odd given the UK has quite a lot of vaccines.

[Pebble thats Stubby]

9 minutes ago, Padraig said:

Its the principle.  This has 0 impact on actual distribution (as far as I can tell).  But the EU is clearly really annoyed with what AZ has done.  Nothing will get into the UK whatever their knowledge.

And just to be clear, the customs border only applies to the vaccine.

any customs checks looking for vaccine has the effect of slowing all cross board trade.  If you put a customs boarder up you need to enforce it somehow or its doesn't exsit.

[SeanF]

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I don’t understand what principle this is trying to prove? How is creating a border in Ireland , something the EU has spent the last few years ‘attempting’ to prevent, proving a point to AZ? 
 

I don’t think I understand what is to be gained here. The claims I’ve seen is that the EU wants to prevent uncontrolled vaccines getting into the UK, which seems rather odd given the UK has quite a lot of vaccines.

I don’t see what this achieves from the EU’s point of view.  It won’t actually hurt the UK in general, or NI in particular, so how would this put pressure on us to put pressure on AZ?

[ljkeane]

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I don’t understand what principle this is trying to prove? How is creating a border in Ireland , something the EU has spent the last few years ‘attempting’ to prevent, proving a point to AZ? 
 

I don’t think I understand what is to be gained here. The claims I’ve seen is that the EU wants to prevent uncontrolled vaccines getting into the UK, which seems rather odd given the UK has quite a lot of vaccines.

Like Pod says it has zero effect on actual transport of vaccines to Northern Ireland. They come via mainland Britain and even if they didn't the mechanism of the export controls isn't going to be customs checks at the border for smuggled vaccine. It's just a very pointed gesture to illustrate that export bans could apply to the UK.

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I don’t see what this achieves from the EU’s point of view.  It won’t actually hurt the UK in general, or NI in particular, so how would this put pressure on us to put pressure on AZ?

Agree, it looks like a purely vindictive and political act. 
 

I mean look at the countries who are exempt from these export controls, it’s pretty far reaching, and if they genuinely had concerns about the export of vaccines it’s hard to understand why the UK would be much of an issue here

[Pebble thats Stubby]

10 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Agree, it looks like a purely vindictive and political act. 
 

I mean look at the countries who are exempt from these export controls, it’s pretty far reaching, and if they genuinely had concerns about the export of vaccines it’s hard to understand why the UK would be much of an issue here

Its not a vindictive act targeting the Uk because of Brexit.  (or any other reason)  Yes you have not mentioned Brexit.

It is a political act and it does target the UK in particular because that is where the EU think they should get the vaccine shortfalls from.  

[SeanF]

It seems that invoking A 16 was “ a mistake.”

[Padraig]

15 minutes ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

any customs checks looking for vaccine has the effect of slowing all cross board trade.  If you put a customs boarder up you need to enforce it somehow or its doesn't exsit.

Nobody is going to be sneaking vaccine into NI.   They aren't going to start stopping cars and trucks searching for vaccine!!!

People.  Whatever you are reading on social media, take a deep breath.  You are almost 100% safe to completely ignore it.

[ljkeane]

8 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I mean look at the countries who are exempt from these export controls, it’s pretty far reaching, and if they genuinely had concerns about the export of vaccines it’s hard to understand why the UK would be much of an issue here

Well their current dispute with Aztrazeneca is about the flow of vaccines between the UK and the EU, admittedly largely about the lack of flow of vaccine from the UK to the EU but still. The Pfizer vaccine is exported from the EU to the UK and the Johnson & Johnson one will be.