Political relations between UK-EU

[meltonblue]

Agreed. The problem AZ may have is the contract with the EU. The CEO maintains it was ‘best efforts’, but it seems the contract made it an ‘obligation‘ to supply.

That said, if the vaccines aren’t there, they aren’t there, you can’t magic them out of thin air. Just beef up production, sort out distribution and get on with it.

I suspect AZ will pay a price for this though.

Agree and the EU are completely right to say they don’t care where it’s actually produced.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the contract made public, the way it’s going.

 

[BobKowalski]

This not nice...only a shouty Reuter’s headline at the moment though.

‘EU GIVES FULL "EQUIVALENCE" BASED MARKET ACCESS FOR U.S. CLEARING HOUSES WITH NO TIME LIMIT’

 

[west didsblue]

This not nice...only a shouty Reuter’s headline at the moment though.

‘EU GIVES FULL "EQUIVALENCE" BASED MARKET ACCESS FOR U.S. CLEARING HOUSES WITH NO TIME LIMIT’

LONDON — Clearing houses for securities in the United States will be allowed to serve investors in the European Union, the bloc’s executive European Commission said on Wednesday.

“This decision is a significant first step in the process of recognizing U.S. central counterparties registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in the European Union,” the EU’s financial services chief Mairead McGuinness said in a statement.

Clearers registered with the SEC include DTCC, ICE Clear and London Stock Exchange’s Paris-based LCH SA.

Clearing houses ensure the completion of a stock trade even if one side of the deal goes bust, and the EU had already granted market access for U.S. clearing houses for derivatives.

But Wednesday’s open-ended “equivalence” decision by Brussels contrasts with the time-limited access the EU has given clearers in Britain since it fully left the bloc on Dec. 31.

UK clearers, including the London arm of LCH, only have access for 18 months until June 2022, time the EU said this week that banks in the bloc should use to shift chunks of their euro derivatives positions to the euro zone.

The EU executive said U.S. securities clearers must respect certain risk management requirements known as “liquidation periods” and “anti-procyclicality measures” to activate EU access.

The EU wants to avoid U.S. clearers having a competitive advantage over European peers due to having less restrictive versions of such rules.

 

[Ban-jani]

The EMA worked to a different criteria. You can call it ‘needless’ or ‘prudent’, it doesn‘t matter. The EMA has had reservations about the AZ data for over 65’s, the Swiss, a non EU country had the same reservations and delayed authorisation.

I have no idea who is right or who is wrong, but getting worked up over the EU ‘immorally blocking vaccines’ is a bit rich given we do the same and to be honest I can understand the sentiment behind doing so. A Govt looks after its citizens first and foremost, ie the people who can cast them out of office.

But this is a mainly a production and logistics problem which in time will be sorted. Turning it into some sort of morality sage is a bit OTT in my opinion. Everyone will do whatever it takes to protect their interests, be it the UK or the EU.

But isn’t this more of a case of them blocking our vaccines because their demands aren’t being met, out of spite?

 

[meltonblue]

But isn’t this more of a case of them blocking our vaccines because their demands aren’t being met, out of spite?

No, it’s basically them saying to AstraZeneca (and any other provider) if they’re signing contracts with others that have stipulations on priority based on where the vaccine is produced and they are using it as a reason for not meeting their obligations with them, then they can implement similar themselves too then to make sure those obligations can be fulfilled.

It’s not really an EU UK thing.

 

[Ban-jani]

No, it’s basically them saying to AstraZeneca (and any other provider) if they’re signing contracts with others that have stipulations on priority based on where the vaccine is produced and they are using it as a reason for not meeting their obligations with them, then they can implement similar themselves too then to make sure those obligations can be fulfilled.

It’s not really an EU UK thing.

It does become a an EU/UK issue when they block exports of the vaccine to the UK, which the UK are receiving because they acted more quickly and got to the front of the queue.

This is for both vaccines and predominantly the Pfizer one, which is made in Belgium, according to the BBC.

It’s like me joining the back of the queue at the chippy, the chippy announcing they’ve ran out of stock, then me blocking the door and shouting to those at the front of the queue that no one is allowed to have their dinner until I’ve got mine.

It’s tough shit if there are supply issues, you are/were too late, wrapped up in bureaucracy.

 

[BobKowalski]

LONDON — Clearing houses for securities in the United States will be allowed to serve investors in the European Union, the bloc’s executive European Commission said on Wednesday.

“This decision is a significant first step in the process of recognizing U.S. central counterparties registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in the European Union,” the EU’s financial services chief Mairead McGuinness said in a statement.

Clearers registered with the SEC include DTCC, ICE Clear and London Stock Exchange’s Paris-based LCH SA.

Clearing houses ensure the completion of a stock trade even if one side of the deal goes bust, and the EU had already granted market access for U.S. clearing houses for derivatives.

But Wednesday’s open-ended “equivalence” decision by Brussels contrasts with the time-limited access the EU has given clearers in Britain since it fully left the bloc on Dec. 31.

UK clearers, including the London arm of LCH, only have access for 18 months until June 2022, time the EU said this week that banks in the bloc should use to shift chunks of their euro derivatives positions to the euro zone.

The EU executive said U.S. securities clearers must respect certain risk management requirements known as “liquidation periods” and “anti-procyclicality measures” to activate EU access.

The EU wants to avoid U.S. clearers having a competitive advantage over European peers due to having less restrictive versions of such rules.

They’re giving preference to New York over London. It’s an aggressive move.

 

[hgblue]

They’re giving preference to New York over London. It’s an aggressive move.

They’re starting to resemble some weirdo stalking their ex on Facebook. They need to get over it, we’ve moved on ;)

 

[meltonblue]

It does become a an EU/UK issue when they block exports of the vaccine to the UK, which the UK are receiving because they acted more quickly and got to the front of the queue.

This is for both vaccines and predominantly the Pfizer one, which is made in Belgium, according to the BBC.

It’s like me joining the back of the queue at the chippy, the chippy announcing they’ve ran out of stock, then me blocking the door and shouting to those at the front of the queue that no one is allowed to have their dinner until I’ve got mine.

It’s tough shit if there are supply issues, you are/were too late, wrapped up in bureaucracy.

It’s nothing like that analogy though unless the contract stipulates a customer priority order that has been signed up to, which it won’t have done. When you go to the chippy, you know you have to wait in line. If AZ didn’t stipulate similar in the contract and said, for example, that they could only fulfil it when specific manufacturing plants were operational, the EU won’t care what AZs other contracts or customers are, nor should they, just whether they can fulfil their obligations to them.

Its not just first come first served with any transaction, there’s always a balance between multiple factors. Say that chippy has limited stock. They then have a choice of if they give full portions to the next two people in the queue or they say they’re only doing small portions so they can feed everyone in the queue.

 

[Ban-jani]

It’s nothing like that analogy though unless the contract stipulates a customer priority order that has been signed up to, which it won’t have done. When you go to the chippy, you know you have to wait in line. If AZ didn’t stipulate similar in the contract and said, for example, that they could only fulfil it when specific manufacturing plants were operational, the EU won’t care what AZs other contracts or customers are, nor should they, just whether they can fulfil their obligations to them.

Its not just first come first served with any transaction, there’s always a balance between multiple factors. Say that chippy has limited stock. They then have a choice of if they give full portions to the next two people in the queue or they say they’re only doing small portions so they can feed everyone in the queue.

If they don’t care why are they stopping exports to the UK?

If there truly is no order, which unless we see evidence to the contrary, there could well be based on order timeframes and the EU are disputing supply with AZ and Pfizer, blocking exports is surely an act of aggression?

They are in this position because they acted too slow and I guarantee that if the shoe was on the other foot, and we were the ones that approved too late, then stopped the AZ vaccine going to the EU, who had approved much earlier, the very same people on this thread defending the EU would be calling Johnson every name under the sun for failing to act quicker and for spitefully risking EU lives as a result.