Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[thirdwave]

3 minutes ago, kzb said:

If you actually look at the link provided you will see there is no discrepancy in excess deaths.  We are quite average for Europe.  There's nothing to explain, except perhaps how we did so well despite the disadvantages you list.

I was referring to the often quoted headline figure of CoVID deaths but you make a fair point that this does not appear to translate into a disproportionate excess of overall deaths (there are many other reasons for this obviously)

[debtlessmanc]

10 minutes ago, toreveal said:

What do you think, you think we'll get nothing?  

I have nearly 20years of contributions but 15+ years to go.  

I'm probably at the age where it's going to be difficult to shift careers but not impossible (I'm STEM)

 

who knows, The crunch will come if younger people start to not pay in as the cost is so high.

my problem is that my ex took the best half 8 years ago. In practice for me it means i will have to work til 67 or so. I remarried wisely at least.

Edited January 30, 2021 by debtlessmanc

[kzb]

9 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Nah registrations still rising rapidly, up another 400k in december.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/eu-settlement-scheme-statistics

4.9M+400k Eire citizens

I am still puzzled why there are so many Irish here, given they despise us so much.

[Peter Hun]

12 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

At last some common sense in the MSM.

Political commentator on BBC News just now "This vaccine nationalism we're seeing is really, really, unhelpful".

Even The Guardian

Quote

How are you enjoying the vaccine wars? The EU’s meltdown at the UK is one of those rows that turns you into the grimace-face emoji. I’ve now held that expression for three straight days, presumably along with the other 500 million-odd citizens who just want to get home but whose parents are fighting on the pub floor. Guys … please? PLEASE.

There is a true coach-crash quality to the EU’s reaction to being outfoxed by the UK on vaccine procurement. The commission’s pram has been dramatically emptied of all its toys. It’s like watching an endlessly patient and mild-mannered social studies teacher finally lose it and head-butt a pupil for beating him in a quiz. Oh, sir … I appreciate you’ve had to deal with some awful behaviour from this particular individual over the past few years, but I’m afraid … this is not acceptable. Time to put your corduroy jacket, your peace lily and your idealism in a cardboard box and make the final journey out of the staff car park. Right after the policeman has held your head down so you don’t bang it while being helped into the back seat.

 

As for the outfoxer, I offer a 21-syringe salute to Kate Bingham, 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/29/nationalism-vaccine-mutation-uk-eu

[toreveal]

Just now, debtlessmanc said:

who knows, The crunch will come if younger people start to not pay in as the cost is so high.

my problem is that my ex took the best half 8 years ago. In practice for me it means i will have to work til 67 or so. I remarried widely at least.

Maybe your ex won't get anything at all though, if the whole scheme collapses ....

I can live with getting nothing going forwards, but if we lose the DB we've already accumulated - ouch.  No spouse to contribute!

I think we're in similar fields from your posts about your department, foreign students, online teaching slavery.  It's all very familiar.

[pig]

5 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

You cannot judge either the motives, or indeed the effects of these over-ordering countries right now. 
 

if vaccines are produced earlier and hoarded for U.K. and Canada sole use, or sold on to ROW at some form of profit, then you can hassle the governments involved and claim it has been bad for the world overall. 
 

if the vaccines are shared after initial U.K. and Canadian high risk groups are vaccinated, and are passed on to ROW at cost or even less than cost so that the U.K. and Canada do not profit financially, then they will have simply advanced vaccine production worldwide and actually done overall good. 
 

 

Sorry that might have sounded harsh.

You' got to go back to when they ordered it and todays grim situation. The general clusterfeck can be laid at the governments door, but once you're in the clusterfeck, bearing in mind the pressure it was under you can't really blame the UK for over-paying or accepting too much liability to 110% ensure it was getting vaccine.  Look at the crazy perhaps corrupt stuff it was doing with PPE - this is nothing in comparison.

Can't really blame AZ - I've no doubt they are simply defending a commercial decision, can't really blame the EU countries or any other country also doing everything it can to protect the people they are responsible for.

But you can stand back and see that this is rubbish for everybody on all sorts of levels - its simply the wrong global response.

I remember Trump was up to the same thing at the time - as if neither had the governance abilities to navigate the pandemic  so bet the house on the silver bullet. What I found curious was Canada was also high on the list of over-ordering. 

The EU specifically will have negotiated a good price, a good deal on liability and double checked the drugs safety (or not!) which their citizens + the RoW  will presumably benefit from but the price is that those who couldn't be 4rsed with that sh1t got preferential treatment.

Its perhaps telling that this is the sort of scenario the economic RW love. Can't run a country, deteriorate the state and the globe with fatal consequences to its citizens but at least can revel in good old fashioned capitalist darwinism. 

Thought experiment: Conversely imagine if it had been Serco's Vaccine roll out....

 

[Bruce Banner]

Brexiteer Tory MP on BBC now, spouting anti EU rhetoric .

[14stFlyer]

9 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

2) The EU has a contract with AZ, signed later, but stipulating that 100 million initial doses should be produced in the EU and UK (clause 5.4)

This is the only bit I disagree with your reading on dugs. I see your reading of Clause 5.4 as being deliberately distorting in favour of the EU.

It is clear to me why this clause is there.  Because it was committed to 3 months + earlier, the U.K. supply chain is well in advance of that being set up for EU supply. AstraZeneca wanted to have the option to be able to complete  the EU contract with U.K. supply once the initial U.K. doses committed to had been completed. 

EU politicians are deliberately trying to misrepresent this as saying U.K. funded supply should be redirected to them prior to completion of the initial contract. I believe they are doing this in order to try to shift blame from them for their tardiness in committing to production last year. They are unfairly blaming AZ, and at the same time, in some way implicating it was the nasty U.K. government as well.   
 

I am surprised you are falling for it, and am sure you would not be if it was U.K. politicians that were doing it. 

[Peter Hun]

2 hours ago, pig said:

Oddly, Canada also over ordered vaccine so the UK is not the only country blocking the RoW getting vaccinated:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9173085/Archbishop-Canterbury-Justin-Welby-slams-Canada-ordering-supplies-Covid-vaccine.html

Edit: More info here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/29/canada-and-uk-among-countries-with-most-vaccine-doses-ordered-per-person

WTF? AZN is currently making 100million doses at cost, no profit, for the Rest of the World. They offered the same deal to the EU, profit free vaccine factory, and the EU haggled the shit and refused to pay the full cost up front.

 

[kzb]

7 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

This is the only bit I disagree with your reading on dugs. I see your reading of Clause 5.4 as being deliberately distorting in favour of the EU.

It is clear to me why this clause is there.  Because it was committed to 3 months + earlier, the U.K. supply chain is well in advance of that being set up for EU supply. AstraZeneca wanted to have the option to be able to complete  the EU contract with U.K. supply once the initial U.K. doses committed to had been completed. 

EU politicians are deliberately trying to misrepresent this as saying U.K. funded supply should be redirected to them prior to completion of the initial contract. I believe they are doing this in order to try to shift blame from them for their tardiness in committing to production last year. They are unfairly blaming AZ, and at the same time, in some way implicating it was the nasty U.K. government as well.   
 

I am surprised you are falling for it, and am sure you would not be if it was U.K. politicians that were doing it. 

+1

Good summary of the situation.

[kzb]

12 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

At last some common sense in the MSM.

Political commentator on BBC News just now "This vaccine nationalism we're seeing is really, really, unhelpful".

Except, if the boot were on the other foot, you can bet the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation would be full on, "look how well EU is doing compared to us".  We would never hear the last of it, and unhelpful vaccine nationalism would never have been mentioned.  You know this is true.

[pig]

35 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Canada is an interesting case, it orderd more per head than anyone else but is currently 20th in the world in vaccination

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-20-world-vaccine-doses-administered-1.5891465

whats the difference? They do not manufacture any of the current Vaccines themselves. Human nature at work again, if a country (Bloc) makes the stuff its population gets it. The UK and EU realised this, the UK built capacity and the EU required capacity in the EU in all its contracts.

The only difference here is that the EU was slower.

Yes alongside 'red tape' slower is a euphemism for for better pricing, liability, safety etc

Here is a nugget on pricing :

The EU financially supported the development of the BioNTech and Pfizer vaccine and has obtained a lower price per dose ($14.70 than the US ($19.50). The Moderna vaccine’s development was subsidised by the US government, and it will cost the US about $15 a dose, while the EU is paying $18.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is much cheaper, although neither the UK nor the US can match the EU’s $2.15 deal: they are expecting to pay about $3 and $4, respectively, per dose.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281

 

[kzb]

2 minutes ago, pig said:

Yes alongside 'red tape' slower is a euphemism for for better pricing, liability, safety etc

Here is a nugget on pricing :

The EU financially supported the development of the BioNTech and Pfizer vaccine and has obtained a lower price per dose ($14.70 than the US ($19.50). The Moderna vaccine’s development was subsidised by the US government, and it will cost the US about $15 a dose, while the EU is paying $18.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is much cheaper, although neither the UK nor the US can match the EU’s $2.15 deal: they are expecting to pay about $3 and $4, respectively, per dose.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281

 

Yes, but the shareholders could sue AZ CEO if he sells to the lowest price customer at a time when there is saturated demand from the higher price customers, and there is no legal reason to do so.

[zugzwang]

3 minutes ago, kzb said:

Except, if the boot were on the other foot, you can bet the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation would be full on, "look how well EU is doing compared to us".  We would never hear the last of it, and unhelpful vaccine nationalism would never have been mentioned.  You know this is true.

The UK currently has third worst healthcare performance in Europe after Belgium and Slovenia, and arguably the worst economic performance in the entire world.

What else should the BBC be saying, dummy?

[Bruce Banner]

7 minutes ago, kzb said:

Except, if the boot were on the other foot, you can bet the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation would be full on, "look how well EU is doing compared to us".  We would never hear the last of it, and unhelpful vaccine nationalism would never have been mentioned.  You know this is true.

I know no such thing. After four years of Brexit the EU has moved on.

[pig]

13 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

WTF? AZN is currently making 100million doses at cost, no profit, for the Rest of the World. They offered the same deal to the EU, profit free vaccine factory, and the EU haggled the shit and refused to pay the full cost up front.

 

Yeah we'd need a lot more in the round information on this. In simplistic terms If the EU invested 200m that would be $2 per vaccine...

[kzb]

1 minute ago, zugzwang said:

The UK currently has third worst healthcare performance in Europe after Belgium and Slovenia, and arguably the worst economic performance in the entire world.

What else should the BBC be saying, dummy?

Did you read that link above about excess deaths?

On your last sentence you've waded in once again and made a completely nonsense comment in the context of the discussion.

[kzb]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

I know no such thing. After four years of Brexit the EU has moved on.

The BBC hasn't though.

[pig]

3 minutes ago, kzb said:

Yes, but the shareholders could sue AZ CEO if he sells to the lowest price customer at a time when there is saturated demand from the higher price customers, and there is no legal reason to do so.

Well exactly, so 'blaming' AZ (or the UK) is immature. As EAs would love to say its a sellers market. But hence globally a p1ss poor way of managing distribution of the vaccine, from which we will all suffer long term.

[dugsbody]

30 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

This is the only bit I disagree with your reading on dugs. I see your reading of Clause 5.4 as being deliberately distorting in favour of the EU.

It is clear to me why this clause is there.  Because it was committed to 3 months + earlier, the U.K. supply chain is well in advance of that being set up for EU supply. AstraZeneca wanted to have the option to be able to complete  the EU contract with U.K. supply once the initial U.K. doses committed to had been completed. 

EU politicians are deliberately trying to misrepresent this as saying U.K. funded supply should be redirected to them prior to completion of the initial contract. I believe they are doing this in order to try to shift blame from them for their tardiness in committing to production last year. They are unfairly blaming AZ, and at the same time, in some way implicating it was the nasty U.K. government as well.   
 

I am surprised you are falling for it, and am sure you would not be if it was U.K. politicians that were doing it. 

Thank you, that is the closest I think someone has come to acknowledging that clause 5.4 contains what it does. Perhaps you are correct, your view could be feasible. But we do not know which party added that to the contract. We do know it is in the contract and we know that the UK sites are listed as initial dose suppliers as stipulated in <whatever the relevant order section it was>. So I come back to my point, that regardless of who inserted it or intent, we have a clause in the EU/AZ contract that allows the EU to make a claim on doses from UK sites for initial delivery.

Now, correctly, the UK obviously don't want that to happen and insist none of this production will go to the EU before the UK initial order is complete. UK people seem happy with that.

So why are UK people unhappy that the EU are taking the same approach with AZ suppliers inside the EU?

Edited January 30, 2021 by dugsbody

[Peter Hun]

5 minutes ago, kzb said:

Yes, but the shareholders could sue AZ CEO if he sells to the lowest price customer at a time when there is saturated demand from the higher price customers, and there is no legal reason to do so.

AZN is making the vaccine for NO PROFIT. This is why it cost $2 v $14 for the other vaccine makers.

This is also why the EU claims that AZN is diverting doses to higher paying customers is ridiculous, AZN is supplying a factory not vaccines.

[debtlessmanc]

13 minutes ago, pig said:

Yes alongside 'red tape' slower is a euphemism for for better pricing, liability, safety etc

Here is a nugget on pricing :

The EU financially supported the development of the BioNTech and Pfizer vaccine and has obtained a lower price per dose ($14.70 than the US ($19.50). The Moderna vaccine’s development was subsidised by the US government, and it will cost the US about $15 a dose, while the EU is paying $18.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is much cheaper, although neither the UK nor the US can match the EU’s $2.15 deal: they are expecting to pay about $3 and $4, respectively, per dose.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281

 

Better pricing? you mean they spent 3 months haggling AZ down by a euro or so? It is a bit OCD isnt't 

 

[Peter Hun]

5 minutes ago, pig said:

Yeah we'd need a lot more in the round information on this. In simplistic terms If the EU invested 200m that would be $2 per vaccine...

They agreed  336m for 400m doses production capacity. Paid 2/3 up front.

Of course the countries decided to wait for the cheaper AZN vaccine and the delay in starting its  factory build means they'll end up paying $15 for the more expensive, but available vaccines.

[Brendan110_0]

14 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

I know no such thing. After four years of Brexit the EU has moved on.

No it hasn't, they need to be seen to punish the UK. Unfortunately the EU has begun to act like a crazed spurned girlfriend, this will only foster anti EU sentiment, forget re-joining you'll see a huge swing in the 52:48 split we had to 70:30 **** the EU and that is down to EU leaders loose lips.

[winkie]

When people don't trust the government, how are they expected to trust the EU?