What a weird story we have two companies in the UK supplying the drug and not honoring supplier to Europe, but one company overseas not honoring supply to UK. So why is this stupid situation worth newsprint? So why do we need to send overseas, when we should supply to the UK only? and then need supply from overseas?

It’s all a matter of timing.

 

AZ “we have this vaccine for sale, no takers yet, anybody want it?”

UK “Yes please. We’ll take your first 100 million doses”

AZ “Agreed, here’s your contract”

 

3 months pass...

 

EU “Please can we order your vaccine?”

AZ “Sure, but we are contractually bound to supply the UK first, you’ll have to get in line”

 

EU Bluster as the proverbial hit the fan...

48 minutes ago, phetpeter said:

What a weird story we have two companies in the UK supplying the drug and not honoring supplier to Europe, but one company overseas not honoring supply to UK. So why is this stupid situation worth newsprint? So why do we need to send overseas, when we should supply to the UK only? and then need supply from overseas?

The problem is the companies are honoring (or trying to honor) their contracts.

 

Orders have to be fulfilled in the order they were signed.

 

In the case of AZ they were very clear to the EU that the UK has a pre-existing contract for the first 100 million doses.

 

The EU isn’t happy with this, and there is no way AZ would give the EU a contract that contradicts an earlier contractual commitment.

 

Soriot has been quite clear that AZ’s contract with the UK has to be honored first.

 

I am willing to bet that the UK stipulated any dispute would be subject to UK law and UK jurisdiction and that the UK foresaw this and tied AZ down in knots.

 

Like every order of every product in the world, orders are fulfilled in date order, you can’t jump in 3 months later and say you want to queue jump.

1 hour ago, Surelynot said:

Which many on here have disputed and demand evidence for......I have seen it said on other forums, but the Brexiteers insist the UK would not do such a thing....it simply isn't cricket.

The head of AZ (Soriot) has been very clear, they have pre-existing contractual commitments to the UK and made this clear the moment the EU tried to order the vaccine.

 

Soriot will not give the EU a contract that would cause him to break an earlier contract. He said this at the outset.

 

You Snooze, You Lose.

8 hours ago, Victornoir said:

The UK has not honored any of its production and reciprocity commitments with EU, it receives the same in return.

 

Confidence is now broken between these 2 entities with serious consequences for future exchanges.

 

 

Justify and provide back up links for that statement.

 

I have followed this closely and I do not believe your statement at all.

 

The EU is bitter and twisted regarding this and also with them dropping the ball and not committing financially for the production of the vaccine, unlike the UK.

 

They hate the fact that the UK has rolled out faster and more successfully due to more transparency, getting in first, committing financially, and a lack of EU red tape.

 

Snooze you lose, and they were fast asleep and now the EU are trying to act like bullies!

 

We also don't need any nonsense talking about views and opinions of Brexiteers, Brexit is done!  Why keep on and on about it.

 

You place an order, you make a contract, you pay your money three months before the EU, and now the EU are bleating they haven't got their order ahead of others. Ridiculous.The UK involved contract specialist lawyers to examine and draw up the contacts based on British Law. The EU relied on Belgian law. I have enclosed links below.

 

And if we are going to really bitch about it, it was a British Swedish vaccine developed by Oxford university, not Germany or France!

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

It’s all a matter of timing.

 

AZ “we have this vaccine for sale, no takers yet, anybody want it?”

UK “Yes please. We’ll take your first 100 million doses”

AZ “Agreed, here’s your contract”

 

3 months pass...

 

EU “Please can we order your vaccine?”

AZ “Sure, but we are contractually bound to supply the UK first, you’ll have to get in line”

 

EU Bluster as the proverbial hit the fan...

You got the chronology wrong. That's how it happened:

 

EU: we are happy to sign this contract for 300 million doses and we give you a pre-payment of €336 million so you can start working on this contract without having to spend your own money

AZ: thank you, we'll make good use of it. ????

 

One day later:

UK: sorry for signing this final contract so late, we've been a bit busy with Brexit negotiations. So we want to order 100 million doses but we want a UK first clause in the contract

AZ: No problem! We have signed yesterday with the EU for 300 million doses and have already pocketed €336 million, but we don't care about those suckers. Additionally, we will not seek EU approval for our plant in the Netherlands. Therefore we can tell them we are unable to deliver the expected quantities and ship production to UK. ????

7 minutes ago, candide said:

You got the chronology wrong. That's how it happened:

 

EU: we are happy to sign this contract for 300 million doses and we give you a pre-payment of €336 million so you can start working on this contract without having to spend your own money

AZ: thank you, we'll make good use of it. ????

 

One day later:

UK: sorry for signing this final contract so late, we've been a bit busy with Brexit negotiations. So we want to order 100 million doses but we want a UK first clause in the contract

AZ: No problem! We have signed yesterday with the EU for 300 million doses and have already pocketed €336 million, but we don't care about those suckers. Additionally, we will not seek EU approval for our plant in the Netherlands. Therefore we can tell them we are unable to deliver the expected quantities and ship production to UK. ????

This is the timescale regarding the AZ-EU contract, and I quote

“

(i) AstraZeneca signed its agreement three months after the agreement that it signed with the UK; and

(ii) the agreement Astra Zeneca signed does not specify when the doses should be delivered.

If the contract AstraZeneca entered into had specified the laws of England and Wales applied, it is unlikely any duty of good faith and fair dealing would have been implied into the contract.

Only time will tell how this dispute plays out.”

32 minutes ago, candide said:

You got the chronology wrong. That's how it happened:

 

EU: we are happy to sign this contract for 300 million doses and we give you a pre-payment of €336 million so you can start working on this contract without having to spend your own money

AZ: thank you, we'll make good use of it. ????

 

One day later:

UK: sorry for signing this final contract so late, we've been a bit busy with Brexit negotiations. So we want to order 100 million doses but we want a UK first clause in the contract

AZ: No problem! We have signed yesterday with the EU for 300 million doses and have already pocketed €336 million, but we don't care about those suckers. Additionally, we will not seek EU approval for our plant in the Netherlands. Therefore we can tell them we are unable to deliver the expected quantities and ship production to UK. ????

 

 

I have enclosed clear links below in another post which explains things a little clearer.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, ukrules said:

Sounds like a broken contract by me, broken by the EU.

 

Is a contract null and void if they break it?

 

8 hours ago, vinny41 said:

The UK doesn't have a contract with the EU to supply any vaccines

Similarly, the EU doesn't have a contract with the UK to supply any vaccine!

The EU is politicising this situation because of their need to punish UK for brexit. Their bureaucracy is covering up its incompetence in commissioning vaccine supply initially. Why do they need more AZ vaccines when they already have millions of doses in storage unused because of its “distrust” of it?

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

Somehow I don't think so.

Somehow I think you/he may be wrong. 
 

 

 

2 minutes ago, retayl said:

The EU is politicising this situation because of their need to punish UK for brexit.

There’s no punishment. 
 

2 minutes ago, retayl said:

Their bureaucracy is covering up its incompetence in commissioning vaccine supply initially.

There’s no bureaucracy or incompetence. 
 

2 minutes ago, retayl said:

Why do they need more AZ vaccines when they already have millions of doses in storage unused because of its “distrust” of it?

The EU doesn’t have millions of doses storage unused. 

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

It’s all a matter of timing.

 

AZ “we have this vaccine for sale, no takers yet, anybody want it?”

UK “Yes please. We’ll take your first 100 million doses”

AZ “Agreed, here’s your contract”

 

3 months pass...

 

EU “Please can we order your vaccine?”

AZ “Sure, but we are contractually bound to supply the UK first, you’ll have to get in line”

 

EU Bluster as the proverbial hit the fan...

Nice try making things up. Next time, stick to the facts. 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/17/europe/uk-astrazeneca-vaccine-contract-details-intl/index.html

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/

 

This is a bit more balanced as opposed to selective suitable passages and paragraphs that some are trying to justify their stance.

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Victornoir said:

The UK has not honored any of its production and reciprocity commitments with EU, it receives the same in return.

 

Confidence is now broken between these 2 entities with serious consequences for future exchanges.

 

You're confusing a company listed on Wall Street (AstraZeneca) with the UK government, not an easy mistake to make but you did it all the same.

 

 

16 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

(ii) the agreement Astra Zeneca signed does not specify when the doses should be delivered.

Except Clause 5.1 and Schedule A of the agreement say the opposite. 

13 minutes ago, cocoonclub said:

 

The EU doesn’t have millions of doses storage unused. 

Revealed: Millions of Oxford vaccine doses sitting unused across the EU https://uk.news.yahoo.com/millions-oxford-astrazeneca-unused-eu-190844906.html

Whats the problem? The UK has a policy of UK first. The EU has a policy of EU first.

Along with the United States, India and almost every other country producing a vaccination has the same.

Oh its a problem because its the vile EU? Ah right. I was forgetting that British exceptionalism transcends all.

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Revealed: Millions of Oxford vaccine doses sitting unused across the EU https://uk.news.yahoo.com/millions-oxford-astrazeneca-unused-eu-190844906.html

You claimed the EU (1) has “millions of doses in storage unused” because (2) “of its “distrust” of it”. Now you post an article that doesn’t support either of the two assertions; in fact, your article clearly says the EU “has insisted the jab is safe.”

5 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Revealed: Millions of Oxford vaccine doses sitting unused across the EU https://uk.news.yahoo.com/millions-oxford-astrazeneca-unused-eu-190844906.html

 

Unused while injections of Astra Zeneca were suspended pending investigations into possible side effects.

It does not mean they are going to waste and will not be used. Indeed my understanding is Germany and France have started using them again.

17 minutes ago, ukrules said:

 

You're confusing a company listed on Wall Street (AstraZeneca) with the UK government, not an easy mistake to make but you did it all the same.

 

Same as our British friends are confusing a company listed on Wall Street (AstraZeneca) with the EU, and the EU with European countries. Not an easy mistake to make but they do it all the same.

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Unused while injections of Astra Zeneca were suspended pending investigations into possible side effects.

It does not mean they are going to waste and will not be used. Indeed my understanding is Germany and France have started using them again.

You said this: "The EU doesn’t have millions of doses storage unused."

 

You were wrong and I provided a link to prove it.

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

You said this: "The EU doesn’t have millions of doses storage unused."

 

You were wrong and I provided a link to prove it.

Your link doesn’t support your claim. In fact, it debunks your claim. 
 

you’re the only one who is wrong. 
 

 

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

You said this: "The EU doesn’t have millions of doses storage unused."

 

You were wrong and I provided a link to prove it.

 

I did not. You have quoted the wrong guy.

1 minute ago, cocoonclub said:

Your link doesn’t support your claim. In fact, it contradicts your claim. 

Oh ok probably the English here is not clear enough for me....................

 

More than seven million Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine doses delivered to EU countries have not been used.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) figures show 7,187,963 doses have not been administered out of a total 15,853,227 delivered.

That means 45% have gone unused across the EU.

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Oh ok probably the English here is not clear enough for me....................

 

More than seven million Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine doses delivered to EU countries have not been used.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) figures show 7,187,963 doses have not been administered out of a total 15,853,227 delivered.

That means 45% have gone unused across the EU.

But that wasn’t what you claimed initially. Your claim was that (1) “[the EU has] millions of doses instorage unused” because (2) “of its “distrust” of it”. The article you posted debunks both (1) and (2). It clearly says that those “millions of doses” are not with the EU but with Germany and other countries, and that the EU even insisted the vaccine is safe. 
 

Now if you actually meant that the EU recommended using the vaccine and that countries such as Germany et. al. are storing unused doses then you should consider changing your reply. 

9 minutes ago, cocoonclub said:

But that wasn’t what you claimed initially. Your claim was that (1) the EU has “millions of doses instorage unused” because (2) “of its “distrust” of it”. The article you posted debunks both (1) and (2). It clearly says that those “millions of doses” are not with the EU but with Germany and other countries, and that the EU even insisted the vaccine is safe. 

I didn't make any claim? I copied and pasted a headline and link directly, no paraphrase. Here it is again for you. The claim is made by James Morris ·Senior news reporter, Yahoo News UK

 

"Revealed: Millions of Oxford vaccine doses sitting unused across the EU" https://uk.news.yahoo.com/millions-oxford-astrazeneca-unused-eu-190844906.html

 

Here's another claim. Note. Made by Bloomberg

 

EU, With Millions of Doses Unused, Is Divided on Export Ban. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-18/europe-with-millions-of-doses-unused-is-divided-on-export-ban

35 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

This is the timescale regarding the AZ-EU contract, and I quote

“

(i) AstraZeneca signed its agreement three months after the agreement that it signed with the UK; and

(ii) the agreement Astra Zeneca signed does not specify when the doses should be delivered.

If the contract AstraZeneca entered into had specified the laws of England and Wales applied, it is unlikely any duty of good faith and fair dealing would have been implied into the contract.

Only time will tell how this dispute plays out.”

There was a preliminary agreement on supply chain in May, but the final contract with UK was signed one day after the EU. There was also a preliminary agreement with the first European alliance for 300 million doses in June.

 

From the Politico article linked by Scouse123

"AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot made the argument that the U.K. had better vaccine supply because the U.K. signed an agreement for vaccines months earlier than the EU. Formally, this isn’t true: The U.K. contract was signed on August 28, while the EU’s was signed a day earlier on August 27. 

However, the key lies in an earlier agreement that AstraZeneca made back in May with the U.K., which was a binding deal establishing “the development of a dedicated supply chain for the U.K.,” an AstraZeneca spokesperson said."

 

20 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Oh ok probably the English here is not clear enough for me....................

 

More than seven million Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine doses delivered to EU countries have not been used.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) figures show 7,187,963 doses have not been administered out of a total 15,853,227 delivered.

That means 45% have gone unused across the EU.

The figures are probably right. However, it doesn't mean It's stupid to do so. There are two main reason:

- vaccine centres capacity has been initially used exclusively for 75 and 75+ people, as well as high risk groups, with Pfizer jab,

- due to the mandatory 3 weeks delay between first and second jab, the policy is usually to store the second jab in advance (in particular as AZ is unreliable for deliveries).

 

Now I ask you: UK has around 26 million vaccinated people with only 4% having received their second dose. Which country will start to seriously store vaccines?

Seems another downside of brexit. UK will just have to use its own.