gallois wrote:
So you think it is good business practice or best endeavours to agree to supply xx doses by January and fail to do so? Then agree to meet the order by the 2nd quarter and fail. Then after further discussion promise to supply by June, but this week declare that they would probably not be able to meet that deadline.
Nope. I completely agree that AZ fucked up, they promised more they could deliver (best endeavours or not, at least a failure in expectation setting). Probably contractually, too, although that is less clear cut – best endeavours do not require you to break other contracts, but they also said there were no other obligations preventing them from delivery. My point is that the mature response, if it can’t be resolved amicably, is “see you in court”, not “let’s take it outside” [for the non-English – the traditional invitation to have a fistfight in the alleyway outside the pub].
gallois wrote:
On this forum people are lining up on National lines
I give you three guesses what my nationality is… 
but in my opinion, you can take Boris and the EU Commission, put them all in a sack, tie it up and hit it with a cricket bat for as long as you like. You will always hit the right one.
Cobalt wrote:
with a cricket bat
This may also need explaining for the non-English.
The French, baffled as to its purpose, generally admit it to their shores under the customs category ‘engine sportif sans mouvement mecanique’.
Cobalt
Again, I find myself agreeing, and Gallois, I hope at least some of us take a mature and non partisan approach.
If there is a partisan approach, it is simply that I find it difficult to see why the EU is dragging the UK into this by threatening to block supplies. I can understand the EU may well believe it has grounds for a contractual dispute with AZ, (which I would add is a multinational company), and by all means they are entitled and should pursue an action through the Courts – but they wont and dont primarily because by the time it is heard, and appealed etc, none of this will make much difference anyway, so in that knowledge they have moved to try and drag the UK into the arguement, whereas in fact it is difficult to understand how this can be justifed. So, I dont think this position is partisan, unless you can put an arguement as to why the UK is culpable and should be under threat of an export ban?
If you can, I would be genuinely interested to read your argument please.
Or, on second thoughts, why don’t we team up. @gallois can toss some boules, I’ll bring a bat, and because a Fussball is a bit too soft @Malibuflyer can maybe bring a tennis racket, and @Peter can bring an ice hockey stick for old time’s sake. Might be a nice cross-country bonding exercise, feel free to put in some of your “favourite” politicians ant put them in the sack, too.
Cobalt wrote:
Or, on second thoughts, why don’t we team up. @gallois can toss some boules, I’ll bring a bat, and because a Fussball is a bit too soft @Malibuflyer can maybe bring a tennis racket, and @Peter can bring an ice hockey stick for old time’s sake. Might be a nice cross-country bonding exercise, feel free to put in some of your “favourite” politicians ant put them in the sack, too.
Great idea! A baseball bat would complement that assortment nicely, methinks. Only problem I see is the size of the sack. Might have to be a very big one….
Cobalt wrote:
I give you three guesses what my nationality is…
Oh, @Gallois. you can try that with me as well. You might be surprised !
Fuji_Abound wrote:
So, I dont think this position is partisan, unless you can put an arguement as to why the UK is culpable and should be under threat of an export ban?
The general inference seems to be that the UK government exerts an influence on AZ and prevents it using vaccine produced in the UK to top up the EU order.
The oddity is that even if AZ diverted all UK production to the EU and left the UK with precisely nothing it would hardly make a difference, such is the EU population size.
Peter wrote:
Some bad but interesting news from Germany, in an interview with a hospital doctor there. Their average age is going down and patients are in the 20-50 year range, with an average stay of 40-60 days (!), and with mortality having increased by 1.6x (he didn’t say from what previous figure). The long average stay will fill up the beds fairly fast.
A comparison with the UK is probably not directly possible because here the NHS sends you home as soon as you can be moved into a wheelchair! However, here, 10% of ex hospital patients die within 6 months of being sent home. And if you have been lying on your back in bed for a month, you will likely not be able to walk anyway afterwards…
This is a really bad disease, but imagine if it was 10x worse like e.g. SARS was in 2003.
Yep, it’s looking pretty bad. The health ministry already expects our hospitals to be overwhelmed in April.
Interestingly, “on the ground” in my hospital everything continues almost as always, no postponement of elective surgery like last year…
As a matter of interest why is there no criticism of India which has also put an export ban on AZ vaccine produced under licence in India going to the UK? 10m doses I believe.
Graham wrote:
The general inference seems to be that the UK government exerts an influence on AZ and prevents it using vaccine produced in the UK to top up the EU order.The oddity is that even if AZ diverted all UK production to the EU and left the UK with precisely nothing it would hardly make a difference, such is the EU population size.
but does it go even further? It would seem sometimes it is almost as if the UK should not be ahead of the EU, so even though you are correct, the fact it had levelled up the playing field, would make it ok. It is almost as if the UK should still play by the EU rules, even though it is no longer part of the EU.
I dont think the EU can still entirely accept the UK has gone (and I voted to stay!), but gone it has, that ship has sailed.
