Political relations between UK-EU

[Kazzydeyna]

I also have no problem with people posting tweets as long as they're not opinion stated as fact.
I agree that the EU have handled it particularly badly but I find the ill-disguised gloating about it from some on here unpleasant, and the attempts to link it to Brexit pathetic.

Welcome to our world for the last 4 years chief

 

[mcfc1632]

This thread is EU-UK relations though, Brexit is done

Of course it central to the theme of this thread

What else do people think is happening at the moment that could be more impactful to relations between the UK and EU

 

[Vic]

You're having fun, aren't you ;)

Posting irrelevant stuff. Can no-one read?

 

[BobKowalski]

My ‘hot take’ is now that AZ agreed to serve two masters and that is always a difficult trick to pull off :)

 

[Kazzydeyna]

AstraZeneca said on Wednesday that it can't send doses made in the UK to the EU, because it's contract for UK supplies prevented this. I'm only guessing made in the UK is for the UK based on this statement.

Doesnt matter Anyway mate. Even if they wanted to send some UK manufactured vaccines to the EU they would be unable to get them there as apparently there would be mountains of red tape and customs checks required and there would be a 150 mile tailback through Kent.

Unless the EU were to waive such red tape but they’d never do that would they. It’s not like they’re hypocrites.

 

[meltonblue]

So whats the score here chaps, can the EU force AZ to divert the UKs vaccines to the EU? Ive not been following this closely the last couple of days.

So, in a nutshell, no, but they can argue AZ have breached their contract. Basically, AZ have a statement in the EU contract that backs up the EU position that those vaccines being provided to the U.K. is not a valid reason for AZ to give to them for not being able to supply it.

Doesn’t help them get what they need though, just that AZ shouldn’t have given that as the reason for the delay.

 

[Vic]

Literally black and white

I am confident that we will see some 'character' and a number of posters rushing to correct their comments

You really haven't done contract law, have you?

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Doesnt matter Anyway mate. Even if they wanted to send some UK manufactured vaccines to the EU they would be unable to get them there as apparently there would be mountains of red tape and customs checks required and there would be a 150 mile tailback through Kent.

Unless the EU were to waive such red tape but they’d never do that would they. It’s not like they’re hypocrites.

maybe there's a deal to be made there...

 

[mcfc1632]

So whats the score here chaps, can the EU force AZ to divert the UKs vaccines to the EU? Ive not been following this closely the last couple of days.

At this precise point, I would summarise it as...........

Following a couple of days when a number of posters have gone to extremes to support and justify the words and actions of the EU - and rubbished AZ and been unable to admit that the UK have done well by steering clear of the EU wide procurement (despite what some said late last year), we are awaiting........

Copious amounts of humble pie

Like the apocalypse this seems to be stubbornly refusing to put in an appearance.

But to directly answer your question :

No, it seems that they cannot, unless AZ and the UK cave in to what is from the EU a lot of bluster to cover their cock-up

 

[Vic]

Yes, completely agree they have handled the comms around this terribly and been made to look foolish by AZ simply playing a straight bat and telling the truth.

It sounds like AZ may have signed a contract to perform what cannot be performed because they had already signed a contract to (secretly) give priority to another customer.

 

[metalblue]

Yep which would back up the EU saying that would be a breach of contract.

It doesn’t back that up at all though. The only time I have seem the UK explicitly mentioned is as an acceptable site for manufacture. The contract talks of competing agreements with participating member states and that these would be resolved on a best efforts basis. To treat non-participating members less favourably would surely be tested in a court as unfair and thus not a breach. No smoking guns and the only winners here will be the lawyers.

 

[meltonblue]

It doesn’t back that up at all though. The only time I have seem the UK explicitly mentioned is as an acceptable site for manufacture. The contract talks of competing agreements with participating member states and that these would be resolved on a best efforts basis. To treat non-participating members less favourably would surely be tested in a court as unfair and thus not a breach. No smoking guns and the only winners here will be the lawyers.

Its explicitly mentioned in the contract about any other agreements, think you need to reread it fully.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Still thinks it's the brexit thread, that's why.

I can see how it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other.

This will sour EU/UK relationship but the actual subject is Covid political and there are other questions that I would like it to spread to which, would stray it further from Brexit.

In the end it doesn’t matter where it’s discussed I suppose, but I still see the issue itself rather than how it may develop as not Brexit driven.

 

[Vic]

So whats the score here chaps, can the EU force AZ to divert the UKs vaccines to the EU? Ive not been following this closely the last couple of days.

The issue may be that the EU contracted to buy vaccines made in the UK (not the UK's vaccines) without knowing that AZ had already contracted to sell the same vaccines to the UK.

 

[andyhinch]

It sounds like AZ may have signed a contract to perform what cannot be performed because they had already signed a contract to (secretly) give priority to another customer.

I’m trying to understand why the EU didn’t ask what commitments AZ had made knowing that Britain had already made steps to procure the vaccine I’m assuming that they didn’t.

 

[meltonblue]

I’m trying to understand why the EU didn’t ask what commitments AZ had made knowing that Britain had already made steps to procure the vaccine I’m assuming that they didn’t.

They did, it’s in the contract that AZ were not under any obligation to anyone else that could impact on them fulfilling the order for the EU.

That is the breach they’re arguing - AZ can’t give the reason they have as justification for the delay.

 

[metalblue]

Its explicitly mentioned in the contract about any other agreements, think you need to reread it fully.

Which clause please? I may well have missed it

5.1.h refers to competing agreements on or behalf of participating member states

6.2 refers to competing agreements enter into or on behalf of the commission

 

[meltonblue]

Which clause please? I may well have missed it

5.1.h refers to competing agreements on or behalf of participating member states

6.2 refers to competing agreements enter into or on behalf of the commission

13.1.

 

[The perfect fumble]

If I'm reading this right and I believe I am, the EU is in the right.

If AstraZeneca has production problems and therefore cannot fulfil its contractual obligations to all parties, The EU is within its rights to expect that all parties take a hit.

Oh, by the way, this is very much about Brexit.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I’m trying to understand why the EU didn’t ask what commitments AZ had made knowing that Britain had already made steps to procure the vaccine I’m assuming that they didn’t.

That's not the point, If you commit to selling me a pint of milk, whatever commitments you have regarding supplying milk to the bloke down the road is immaterial.