European Commission snubs 300m doses of AZ and J&J vaccine

tommytwojags

Well-known member
The EC is set to turn down an extra 300 million doses of AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccines that it has secured under existing contracts. Commission President Ursula VDL is furious that AZ has not delivered enough doses of its vaccine to member states and has decided it will only opt to buy up vaccines that use the mRNA technology, such as Pfizer and Moderna. The European Commission, AstraZeneca and J&J declined to comment on the issue. The Commission is expected to open talks to buy additional Pfizer vaccines in their place. It wants to use the German-designed jab for all future Brussels-led boost programmes to curb the spread of the coronavirus. UVDL said this was because Pfizer had “proven to be a reliable partner. In the future we will need to develop vaccines that are adapted to new variants and we will need them early and in sufficient quantities. Having this in mind we need to focus on technologies that have proven their worth."

Well I hope the vaccines that are not considered good enough for the EU will be diverted to India, South America or Africa where I'm sure they will be more than welcome.
 
Watch the poor rollout rapidly catch up and overtake ours.

Well clearly their cack-handed vaccine roll out performance has left them a long way behind and they couldn't do any more in their attempt to catch us. Lying, cheating, bribing, propagandists. If they persist in blocking the export of supplies bought by the UK from a UK company on the mainland they will eventually catch up. It must make Von der Leyen very proud.
 
Last edited:
So if this was the UK and a company had failed to manufacture enough of a small initial order of a product, would you really expect the UK to go back to that very same company and put in an even bigger second order?!!!

Also, the mRNA jabs like Pfizer are easier and quicker to adapt to fit new variants as opposed to the AZ viral vector one. Now we know the speed of mutations is faster than initially hoped, it makes long term strategic sense to prefer those types of vaccine especially when ordering 1.8 billion for 450 million people over the next few years.
 
what another utterly negative post from you about our country. You really hate this country don't you?
And for the record I don't hate this country, the first time you said this it was a load of boring bollocks now its become a weird obsession of yours to falsely brand people who make pertinent points. If you don't like it go and live in North Korea
 
So if this was the UK and a company had failed to manufacture enough of a small initial order of a product, would you really expect the UK to go back to that very same company and put in an even bigger second order?!!!

Also, the mRNA jabs like Pfizer are easier and quicker to adapt to fit new variants as opposed to the AZ viral vector one. Now we know the speed of mutations is faster than initially hoped, it makes long term strategic sense to prefer those types of vaccine especially when ordering 1.8 billion for 450 million people over the next few years.
Quite. When AZ has failed so badly to meet its contractual commitments to the EU, why would the EU exercise options and place even more orders? It’s logical to look for another supplier.
 
Can’t news, this leaves the only supplier of cost price vaccine with more to give to poorer countries, meanwhile the Eu will have to dig deeper.
 
Can’t news, this leaves the only supplier of cost price vaccine with more to give to poorer countries, meanwhile the Eu will have to dig deeper.
So long as the supplies don’t get diverted to another a richer country first that’s right.

The EU get a supplier than can deliver on its promises and poorer countries hopefully get supplies they would otherwise not have received or had to wait for.

A win/win with everyone happy. 👍
 
So the EU have gone from a vaccine that costs the price of a cup of coffee to one the price of a meal for two brilliant that will help the bank balance not.
Well if the supplier can’t or won’t deliver then the customer doesn’t have much choice does it?

Anyway I’m sure it should be possible to secure a significant bulk discount.

Big win for Pfizer and the other companies concerned.
 
So the EU have gone from a vaccine that costs the price of a cup of coffee to one the price of a meal for two brilliant that will help the bank balance not.

The irony is that if UVDL and her sidekicks had agreed a deal with AZ in May instead of trying to renegotiate the terms for another three months (and paying the same price in the end), they would have had first dibs. Instead they lost the vaccines, paid the full price and ruined their reputation with their incompetent handling of the procurement and their self-made propaganda war. Now they want to pay top dollar for the Pfizer vaccine, which is itself subject to a dodgy supply chain. I hope it works out for them because it's in nobody's interest for them to fail again, but at least AZ can get on with its business of supplying the rest of the world.
 
Another reason why this is a very smart move by the EU is because you need to keep topping up coronavirus vaccines with yearly boosters. This is where the AZ vaccine becomes limited because the mechanism used to put it into the body is a virus in itself and people will build up immunity to that injection mechanism so it won't be a vaccine that can be used repeatedly, whereas with mRNA vaccines, they don't use such an injection agent so can be used repeatedly. The EU are ahead of the game on this one.
 
Another reason why this is a very smart move by the EU is because you need to keep topping up coronavirus vaccines with yearly boosters. This is where the AZ vaccine becomes limited because the mechanism used to put it into the body is a virus in itself and people will build up immunity to that injection mechanism so it won't be a vaccine that can be used repeatedly, whereas with mRNA vaccines, they don't use such an injection agent so can be used repeatedly. The EU are ahead of the game on this one.
According to Oxford Uni, the AZ drug is readily adaptable for different strains and therefore the preferable option for boosting jabs.
 
Erm, AZ has met it's contractual committments to the EU, even the EU accepts this.
According to Politico (2 days ago) AZ plans to deliver another 70m doses in the second quarter, totalling 100m doses by July - just a third of the 300m doses it promised when the contract was signed in August 2020.

And you’re surprised, given such a woeful performance by AZ, that the EU are considering not exercising options and are looking at different suppliers?
 
According to Politico (2 days ago) AZ plans to deliver another 70m doses in the second quarter, totalling 100m doses by July - just a third of the 300m doses it promised when the contract was signed in August 2020.

And you’re surprised, given such a woeful performance by AZ, that the EU are considering not exercising options and are looking at different suppliers?
AZ promised nothing, the EU stupidly signed a best endeavours contract which is almost unheard of these days in European contractual agreements. The fact they are a tad pissed off tells its own story hence the backlash against AZ as all they have tried to do is discredit them. If they strongly believe that AZ have defaulted against the contract between the two parties then l would have thought they would have seized the opportunity and screwed them through the appropriate channels or have they started the process, l don’t believe they have?
 
According to Politico (2 days ago) AZ plans to deliver another 70m doses in the second quarter, totalling 100m doses by July - just a third of the 300m doses it promised when the contract was signed in August 2020.

No doses were promised, the agreement was "best efforts", and AZ have undoubtedly done that.

Personally I think they were naive to even give the impression that however many doses were promised, but that's more political than legal.
 
AZ promised nothing, the EU stupidly signed a best endeavours contract which is almost unheard of these days in European contractual agreements. The fact they are a tad pissed off tells its own story hence the backlash against AZ as all they have tried to do is discredit them. If they strongly believe that AZ have defaulted against the contract between the two parties then l would have thought they would have seized the opportunity and screwed them through the appropriate channels or have they started the process, l don’t believe they have?

Some talk about "preparing a legal case": https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-preparing-legal-case-against-astrazeneca-over-vaccine-shortfalls/

The European Commission is getting ready to launch legal proceedings against vaccine producer AstraZeneca, according to five EU diplomats.

The Commission raised the matter at a meeting of ambassadors Wednesday, during which the majority of EU countries said they would support suing the company over complaints it massively failed to deliver pledged doses to the bloc.



Legally I don't think they have a leg to stand on and I think most at the Commission know that, whether these 5 (un-named) diplomats think differently, or if this is just a PR exercise, who knows?

I think the best comment I saw was that when one party shouts and screams and makes all threats legal but no action follows, you know who's right.
 
Some talk about "preparing a legal case": https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-preparing-legal-case-against-astrazeneca-over-vaccine-shortfalls/

The European Commission is getting ready to launch legal proceedings against vaccine producer AstraZeneca, according to five EU diplomats.

The Commission raised the matter at a meeting of ambassadors Wednesday, during which the majority of EU countries said they would support suing the company over complaints it massively failed to deliver pledged doses to the bloc.



Legally I don't think they have a leg to stand on and I think most at the Commission know that, whether these 5 (un-named) diplomats think differently, or if this is just a PR exercise, who knows?

I think the best comment I saw was that when one party shouts and screams and makes all threats legal but no action follows, you know who's right.
I agree and l read the relevant contract articles and it’s clear ‘Best Endeavours’
 
AZ promised nothing, the EU stupidly signed a best endeavours contract which is almost unheard of these days in European contractual agreements.

Appologies for replying to the same post twice but I'd like to focus on this point.

There's nothing particularly wrong with a best endeavours contract, in fact when dealing with a biological product it's all the company can ever do, AFAIK this is exactly the same sort of contract that the UK agreed with AZ, and also what the EU agreed with Pfizer.

The problem was that the EU agreed their contract 3 months too late, which means that production is 3 months behind where it could be.

Why is Pfizer different? Partly I think the EU was able to piggy back on the UK's early orders, which meant that the EU production chain was up and running much earlier than it would've otherwise been.
 
Out of devilment would buy extra Astra Zeneca and offer it at cost to Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece and insist that they reach the same level of immunity as the UK to allow the prospect of travel corridors.
 
All these vaccines work, they work in different ways, they require multinational supply chains to make them and all carry a infinitesimally small risk of harm relative to the impact of catching Covid. This appears to include the Sputnik vaccine which is helping Hungary vaccinate far quicker than other member states.

It really, really doesn't matter which they use provided they crack on and do it rather than talking about it and talking down a vaccine which, according to all medical regulatory agencies is safe and effective and is helping keep people alive in this country.

The fact that Pfizer are going to make a load of money, especially as they are saying you need a third dose (nothing like upselling is there) is good news as it's 1/3 owned by GSK (a British company); the fact that AZ (another half owned British company) took the humanitarian approach should though be celebrated. It's a win win if you like.
 
As the EU deals with lockdown 3 of course they need a scrape goat. Was never going to be the French company they contracted for 300 million doses. This company is no where need trial stage
 
Appologies for replying to the same post twice but I'd like to focus on this point.

There's nothing particularly wrong with a best endeavours contract, in fact when dealing with a biological product it's all the company can ever do, AFAIK this is exactly the same sort of contract that the UK agreed with AZ, and also what the EU agreed with Pfizer.

The problem was that the EU agreed their contract 3 months too late, which means that production is 3 months behind where it could be.

Why is Pfizer different? Partly I think the EU was able to piggy back on the UK's early orders, which meant that the EU production chain was up and running much earlier than it would've otherwise been.
Interesting response LS and some good points raised. It would be very interesting to know how the UK contract compares to the EU contract in terms of deliveries but l assume that the UK paid a lot of money for the front end contract and the associated risk against an unknown product at that time. As far as a Best Endeavours Contract goes I’m not sure how this works in the pharmaceutical industry but this is an absolute no-no in the aircraft business, which l can only assume that it’s not a fixed price arrangement hence perhaps the best endeavours delivery schedule.
 
Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner told the FT "We are not seeing any vaccines in the UK arriving here." However, Matt Hancock shrugged off the comments, explaining the UK has received more doses because it brokered a better deal with AstraZeneca. "They have a ‘best efforts’ contract and we have an exclusivity deal" Mr Hancock said. "Our contract trumps theirs. It’s called contract law — it’s very straightforward."
 
Valneva, the French vaccine maker, has pulled out of talks with the EC after criticising its needless bureaucracy. Ursula von der Leyen has come under fire for her shambolic handling of the scheme which has led to a shortage of supplies across the EU. Scotland based Valneva said it will “deprioritise” talks with the Commission. Its chief executive Thomas Lingelbach said: “We’ve committed significant time and effort to try to meet the needs of the central procurement process, but we have not made meaningful progress. We are now concentrating our efforts on individual EU member states and interested parties outside the EU."

That's a pretty damning assessment of the bureaucracy of the European Commission and of its unwanted interference in the vaccine procurement programme.




 
Appologies for replying to the same post twice but I'd like to focus on this point.

There's nothing particularly wrong with a best endeavours contract, in fact when dealing with a biological product it's all the company can ever do, AFAIK this is exactly the same sort of contract that the UK agreed with AZ, and also what the EU agreed with Pfizer.

The problem was that the EU agreed their contract 3 months too late, which means that production is 3 months behind where it could be.

Why is Pfizer different? Partly I think the EU was able to piggy back on the UK's early orders, which meant that the EU production chain was up and running much earlier than it would've otherwise been.
Did they really agree their contract 3 months too late? How do you know?
 
Some talk about "preparing a legal case": https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-preparing-legal-case-against-astrazeneca-over-vaccine-shortfalls/

The European Commission is getting ready to launch legal proceedings against vaccine producer AstraZeneca, according to five EU diplomats.

The Commission raised the matter at a meeting of ambassadors Wednesday, during which the majority of EU countries said they would support suing the company over complaints it massively failed to deliver pledged doses to the bloc.



Legally I don't think they have a leg to stand on and I think most at the Commission know that, whether these 5 (un-named) diplomats think differently, or if this is just a PR exercise, who knows?

I think the best comment I saw was that when one party shouts and screams and makes all threats legal but no action follows, you know who's right.
You’d better ring them up and tell them so they don’t make fools of themselves!!
 
It’s not always going to cost the price of a cup of coffee. AZ will eventually charge a ‘market’ price!

When they going to up their prices then after we've offered millions in the NOVAVAX scheme nonsense.
Did they really agree their contract 3 months too late? How do you know?
Here you go the contract wasn't signed at 3 months before but the commitment to help pay for the research and making of the vaccine was.

 
Did they really agree their contract 3 months too late? How do you know?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55844268

Take the complaint that the bloc is being treated as "second class" by AstraZeneca. The fact is, when it comes to honouring its contract with the UK, for example, the EU signed its AstraZeneca vaccine contract three months later than Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government.


https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

The European Commission reached its first agreement on doses of a potential coronavirus vaccine in mid-August with pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca, months behind the company's May deal with the UK.

The EU's contract with Pfizer, meanwhile, was not secured until November whereas the UK and US had deals by July with the company.

The US confirmed its first 100 million doses with Moderna in August and invested heavily in vaccine development starting in the spring.

AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot has said the reason for delays to vaccine dose deliveries was in part due to the EU's contract coming months after the UK.



He doesn’t. He just makes stuff up.

🤔 🤔🤔🤔🤔
 
When they going to up their prices then after we've offered millions in the NOVAVAX scheme nonsense.


I have to say, when you read what Politico have produced, it reads like the EU were trying to work with AZ in terms of ‘best endeavours’, given the uncertainties at the time, but it’s worked against the EU. I’m not surprised they now seemed to have said ‘fuck AZ’ and turned to other suppliers!
 
I have to say, when you read what Politico have produced, it reads like the EU were trying to work with AZ in terms of ‘best endeavours’, given the uncertainties at the time, but it’s worked against the EU. I’m not surprised they now seemed to have said ‘fuck AZ’ and turned to other suppliers!
And that's why the EU will be paying through the nose for vaccine's and boost companies profits.

They backed the wrong horse I'm afraid they where dead set on the French vaccine and when that didn't work out.

Where the UK ordered too much and had plenty of eggs in the basket.
 
And that's why the EU will be paying through the nose for vaccine's and boost companies profits.

They backed the wrong horse I'm afraid they where dead set on the French vaccine and when that didn't work out.

Where the UK ordered too much and had plenty of eggs in the basket.
Well, they have plenty of money!
 
Valneva, the French vaccine maker, has pulled out of talks with the EC after criticising its needless bureaucracy. Ursula von der Leyen has come under fire for her shambolic handling of the scheme which has led to a shortage of supplies across the EU. Scotland based Valneva said it will “deprioritise” talks with the Commission. Its chief executive Thomas Lingelbach said: “We’ve committed significant time and effort to try to meet the needs of the central procurement process, but we have not made meaningful progress. We are now concentrating our efforts on individual EU member states and interested parties outside the EU."

That's a pretty damning assessment of the bureaucracy of the European Commission and of its unwanted interference in the vaccine procurement programme.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...EU-secure-100m-vaccine-doses-French-firm.html

Part of the problem seems to be that Valneva is manufactured in Scotland, and the UK has got first call on production from there, rather than setting up their own production or wait in line the EU wants to jump the queue and get access to UK production.

Another problem seems to be that, because of the way AZ has been treated, Valneva is insisting that the contract makes the EU's place in the queue absolultely clear, something that would be a massive loss of face for the EU bureaucrats, they'd prefer to have no vaccine at all rather than be shown up to have failed again.

Really it's the same story all over again, too slow to negotiate contracts, not investing in production at an early stage and when their mistakes become obvious try to bully companies into diverting supplies from elsewhere.
 
Oxford/AZ vaccine latest: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-allows-oxford-astrazeneca-coronavirus-vaccine-to-all-adults/

Germany Thursday opened up the use of the Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine for everyone over the age of 18 in order to speed up immunization efforts, Health Minister Jens Spahn announced.

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣



I think what's happened here is that AZ have now got their EU production up to full speed (and there soon may be a large supply available from the US), thus they're worked out that not using a safe and proven vaccine that's available in large quantities whilst waiting for whatever rubbish comes out of Russia/China is a bit thick.

Interesting that they haven't even bothered with the under 30s restriction we've imposed.

Absolute f***ing clown show.
 
Back
Top