EU turns up heat on Astrazeneca as new COVID-19 wave surges

[webfact]

European Council President Charles Michel speaks during a video conference with the leaders, during an EU summit in Brussels, Belgium March 25, 2021. REUTERS/Yves Herman

 

By Sabine Siebold and Philip Blenkinsop

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union leaders met on Thursday to navigate a common path out of the COVID-19 pandemic as infections surge in many of their countries, seeking agreement on how to ramp up supplies of vaccines after a slow start to immunisations.

 

With distribution of shots uneven across the bloc and member states divided over whether to take a tougher line on vaccine exports, French President Emmanuel Macron voiced frustration over national inoculation programmes that are running far behind those of Britain and the United States.

 

"We didn't shoot for the stars. That should be a lesson for all of us. We were wrong to lack ambition, to lack the madness, I would say, to say: It's possible, let's do it," he told Greek television channel ERT ahead of the summit.

 

As of March 23, Britain had administered nearly 46 vaccines for every 100 people, compared with under 14 per 100 in the 27-nation bloc it left last year, according to figures compiled by website Our World In Data.

 

Europe's rollout, beset with delays, has led to a quarrel with Britain, which has imported 21 million doses made in the EU, according to an EU official. Britain says it did a better job negotiating with manufacturers and arranging supply chains.

 

The EU says it should share more, notably to help make up a massive shortfall in contracted deliveries of AstraZeneca shots. The bloc sent slightly more than one million AstraZeneca doses to Britain before February, said the EU official, who declined to be named.

 

European Union leaders are grappling with disputes over its vaccination program, including how far it has fallen behind the United States and Britain. Matthew Larotonda reports.

 

Highlighting the EU's difficulties, U.S. biotech Novavax is delaying signing a contract to supply its vaccine to the bloc, an EU official told Reuters on Thursday, due to problems sourcing some raw materials.

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, under pressure at home after making a U-turn on plans for an extended Easter holiday to break a third wave of COVID-19, defended the EU's decision to procure vaccines jointly for all member states.

 

"Now that we see that even small differences in the distribution of vaccines cause big discussions, I would not like to imagine if some member states had vaccines and others did not," she told German lawmakers ahead of the summit. "That would shake the internal market to its core."

 

Several countries have complained that vaccines are not being distributed equitably, which Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz warned on Thursday could cause the bloc great harm if it was not rectified.

 

TENSIONS WITH UK

The EU's executive unveiled plans on Wednesday to tighten oversight of vaccine exports that would allow greater scope to block shipments to countries with higher inoculation rates.

 

Brussels and London sought to cool their tensions on Wednesday, declaring that they were working "to create a win-win situation and expand vaccine supply for all our citizens".

 

Although the Commission's proposal on vaccine exports will be discussed at the summit, it is not likely to be explicitly endorsed. Several countries - including Belgium the Netherlands, Ireland, Sweden and Denmark - have reservations.

 

"If we need to have this because one supplier is not delivering then I hope this is a stick which does not have to be used because it might turn out to be lose-lose," said one EU diplomat.

 

European Parliament president David Sassoli, who spoke to the leaders at the start of the meeting, said it was vital for the bloc to remain united.

 

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a tweet she had briefed leaders, with slides showing the global spread of destinations of 77 million vaccine doses shipped from EU plants since the start of December. This covered over 40 countries.

 

She also said the bloc should sharply increase vaccinations given 360 million doses were scheduled for delivery in the second quarter, up from 100 million in the first, highlighting shortfalls from AstraZeneca in both periods.

 

A draft of the summit conclusions seen by Reuters said on vaccines that leaders would stress "the importance of ... export authorisations", and reaffirm that vaccine producers must be respect contractual delivery deadlines.

 

However, diplomats said countries with misgivings about a tougher stand on exports would not put up strong resistance.

"Their message is ... please act very cautiously, in a very balanced way," said one EU diplomat. "But there is nobody who says don't do it."

 

U.S. President Joe Biden will join the leaders briefly at around 1945 GMT, with the pandemic and the warming of transatlantic relations that soured under former President Donald Trump on the agenda, EU officials said.

 

(Additional reporting by John Chalmers, Editing by William Maclean and John Stonestreet)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2021-03-26

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[ourmanflint]

What I don't understand is why the EU are apparently singling out AZ, as all vaccine manufacturers have been beset by delays and false dawns. 

[Megasin1]

1 hour ago, ourmanflint said:

What I don't understand is why the EU are apparently singling out AZ, as all vaccine manufacturers have been beset by delays and false dawns. 

I think its something to do with profits as AZ is running at zero profit, hence the constant dissing of it. AZ has become a target of  the EU also as a smokescreen to cover up their dismal procurement to protect their political positions as they are experiencing dissatisfaction within their respective countries at the progress of their roll out.

[Hi from France]

17 hours ago, ourmanflint said:

What I don't understand is why the EU are apparently singling out AZ, as all vaccine manufacturers have been beset by delays and false dawns. 

Pfizer is delivering according to contract, even a bit faster it seems. And the German/US vaccine is very very officient (like the ModeRNA)

 

 

Astrazeneca signed first a contrat with the EU, then a priority contract with the UK (note the UK did help a lot a early stages). 

 

Month later, it turned out that Astrazeneca could deliver 100 of the UK order but only 30% of the EU order.

 

 

overall Astrazeneca has both

• considerable credibility problems
• huge delivery problems.

 

 

Some will tell you it's because of the "evil EU", some other simply note that they botched their tests which slowed dows approval by health agencies and the product is not as efficient than Pfizer and with a series of adverse reactions.

 

Right now the USA still doesn't want to use it on its own population, accused AZ of data manipulation ... while sitting on a huge stockpile.

 

Now of course Brexiteers will criticize the EU and compliment the USA, go figure...

 

 

 

you can read :

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/26/how-the-astrazeneca-vaccine-became-a-political-football-and-a-pr-disaster

 

 

make me sorry especially the part where

Quote

morale at AstraZeneca is plummeting and that it had never received due credit for its decision to take no profit

I hope AZ can improve their vaccine and make it active against the South African Variant

 

 

personally, if an AstraZeneca shot is available, I take it. Given the situation we cannot afford to be choosy. And risks seem to be an infinitesimal fraction of benefits

 

All elders in my family had the Pfizer shot already, we have one friend who had the AZ.

Edited March 27, 2021 by Hi from France

[Hi from France]

anyone can check that ?

 

Quote

“The UK is proud to have vaccinated many people with the first dose, but they will have a problem with the second dose,” Le Drian said. “And we are fully vaccinated with two doses, not one. Today we have the same number of fully vaccinated people in France and the United Kingdom.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/mar/26/france-uk-struggle-source-second-covid-jabs-eu-blackmail

[RickBradford]

21 hours ago, Megasin1 said:

I think its something to do with profits as AZ is running at zero profit, hence the constant dissing of it.

AZ has already said that it will never again do something so dumb as to try to help people by running at zero profit.

[ourmanflint]

6 hours ago, Hi from France said:

Pfizer is delivering according to contract, even a bit faster it seems. And the German/US vaccine is very very officient (like the ModeRNA)

 

..snip

Not to be picky but that was not the case when this started, Pfizer orders were missing 30% (10 million orders) and moderna were down 20%

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-exclusiv-idUSKBN2AH1E3

[JustAnotherHun]

Fact is, the EU signed a contract with AZ which did not guarantee fixed delivery quantities.

AZ just pledged "best efforts".

Even EU buerocrats confess meanwhile, that the negociation process went wrong on their side and that courts will have to decide, who's sight is the correct one.

 

The "best effort term" is worldwide used, but it's meaning seems to be unknown to the EU amateurs.

Why GB has no such problems with AZ? Because they sent professionals to negociate with professionals.

 

Edited March 27, 2021 by JustAnotherHun

[Hi from France]

2 hours ago, ourmanflint said:

Not to be picky but that was not the case when this started, Pfizer orders were missing 30% (10 million orders) and moderna were down 20%

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-exclusiv-idUSKBN2AH1E3

Yeah I have no source handy, but I read lately that Pfizer was now delivering according to its promises and like 10% more. 

[GinBoy2]

Very strange. This a commercial contractual arrangement between customers and suppliers.

 

I listened to a program on NPR couple of days ago, and a few salient facts were discussed.

 

Generally Governments fund the basic research that facilitates big pharma development of drugs.

 

What then tends to happen is they include a 'march in' provision to allow the funding Governments to step in if they think they need to expand delivery.

 

The US and the UK both waived that 'march in'  clause to delivery, which opened up early agreement on contract deliveries.

 

The EU would not agree to the waiver, and delayed signing of contracts.

 

The result was, the collective bargaining of the EU meant that many countries signed delivery contracts ahead of them.

 

It might sound bad ethically, but they are companies and they sell 'stuff' to the countries who place the orders first

[Hi from France]

2 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

The "best effort term" is worldwide used, but it's meaning seems to be unknown to the EU amateurs.

There's no question the EU team which was rookie, had furthermore been given the wrong brief... 

 

They insisted on health guarantees in case they were problems, and on bulk buying and fair price (we pay up to 1/3 of the UK price apparently). 

 

The UK was simply ready to pay any price to be served first, and of course the UK serves 64 millions while the EU serves 447 millions. So while production is scarce, we need 7 doses when the UK needs one. 

 

I do not think anyone disagree there? 

 

The point of discussion now is not that we failed on private contracts, but sovereignty and reciprocity as we exported 21 millions vaccines to the UK and got none.

Maybe it is a contract but as you know the UK does not even care for the treaties they sign why should we?

 

Moreover AstraZeneca explains the UK has a priority contract, but the EU didn't sign on that in the first place. So we are not breaking a contract, just demanding they deliver our contract now using legal means, article 122 namely. 

 

Granted: the UK is in the supply chain so we are mutually dependant, but no one in 2016 anticipated that a national-populist government would come to power and that our relationship would become so excecrable. 

 

In the future, we have stop relying on the UK for critical goods, but this will take years to achieve that. Right now we just do not have the time. 

 

 

 

 

But seriously do you think for one second that if the situation was reversed, Frost and Johnson would hesitate one second to requisition the UK's vaccine production? 

 

Can you look me in the eyes ???? and tell me that Boris Johnson would deliver the EU first? 

 

. 

Edited March 27, 2021 by Hi from France

[Hi from France]

Good récap of 

https://www.politico.eu/article/new-global-vaccine-fight-follows-old-diplomatic-playbook/

 

• all foreign affairs are “transactional
• Autocratic states are doing extremely well 

[JustAnotherHun]

21 hours ago, Hi from France said:

There's no question the EU team which was rookie, had furthermore been given the wrong brief... 

 

They insisted on health guarantees in case they were problems, and on bulk buying and fair price (we pay up to 1/3 of the UK price apparently). 

 

The UK was simply ready to pay any price to be served first, and of course the UK serves 64 millions while the EU serves 447 millions. So while production is scarce, we need 7 doses when the UK needs one. 

 

I do not think anyone disagree there? 

 

You name some of the main reasons why the EU failed so badly.

 

1. They tried to keep the producer responsible for his product in case of long term issues.

That's usual in a pharmaceutical approval procedure, but senseless in times of a pandemia (if there really is any).

Does anyone believe, a relatively small company like AZ or even the big players could financially handle the costs in case of a big failure? BS! No matter what was negociated, in the end the governments - say: the tax payer - will will pay the worst case bill.

 

2. To haggle about Cents while time is running.

Crazy! Example (Biontec, because the numbers are known):

Israel payed in the early stages 23 € per shot. The EU proudly presented a contract with 12€.

Say we need 500 million shots first and pay the price Israel payed. Costs us 5.5 Billion more for the whole EU. Peanuts! How much is one week lockdown? 

 

3. But the main fault was to transfer the process to the EU buerocracy and otally incompetent negociators ("best effort" term). Did vdL and her team of laughing stocks not even think about calling a lawyer to explain to them what they were signing?

There was a plan by Germany's Jens Spahn to negociate directly with the producers together with his colleagues from France and the Netherlands. That would have been faster and more professional (As Boris Johnson has proved). It was stopped by Merkel for ideological reasons.

 

[quote]

Granted: the UK is in the supply chain so we are mutually dependant, but no one in 2016 anticipated that a national-populist government would come to power and that our relationship would become so excecrable. [/quote]

The "coming to power" of a "national-populist government" was the result of free and democratic elections. This has to be respected and handled by the EU bleeding hearts. And be fair: From the first day of the Brexit process on it was clear that the relationship would be very very complicated. Remember the tone of the talks und the hundreds of "ultimatums". 

 

[quote]But seriously do you think for one second that if the situation was reversed, Frost and Johnson would hesitate one second to requisition the UK's vaccine production? [/quote]

means: " we take the right to stop exports or break contracts because you would do the same in our case"?

Hmmm... ????

But ok: If it comes to a question of life or death no contract is worth the paper it's written on. But imho we are still very far from this point.