When will this shit end?

[Paul ™]

41 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

That looks like the same lockdown as the UK - surely that spike can't be driven by the Kent variant, unless they've only just implemented the above restrictions?

Edit: actually it looks a bit harsher than the UK.

They didn't close schools/universities the first week and only seen a reduction of movement around 30%.

Now they are closed its looking likely it's around 50-60%.

Also since it started 2 weeks ago they have now implemented a local movement restriction Friday evening to Monday morning so you can't move council area and also closed beaches/parks etc.

Today is the start of the 3rd week, I suspect those numbers will come back down pretty quickly from next week.

 

[xxialac]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

except its bests effort.... not x amount by x date

But we don't have a copy of the contract to confirm that. In fact the EU have asked them to publish it which suggest they are confident of their position.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

except its bests effort

and one of the EU statements/quotes I saw posted here admitted to a best efforts clause.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

But we don't have a copy of the contract to confirm that. In fact the EU have asked them to publish it which suggest they are confident of their position.

me, I reckon the Pharma company has the better lawyers for drawing up commercial contracts for pharma supplies. It's what they do every day.

[xxialac]

Just now, eFestivals said:

me, I reckon the Pharma company has the better lawyers for drawing up commercial contracts for pharma supplies. It's what they do every day.

The EU, renowned for its technocrats and its (over?) attention to detail, doesn't have as good inhouse lawyers to put to work on something so absolutely critical?

[st dan]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

me, I reckon the Pharma company has the better lawyers for drawing up commercial contracts for pharma supplies. It's what they do every day.

Yeah, surely there is no way they would have left themselves in such a precarious position and open to legal action for failing to fulfil orders, especially as supply issues were always going to be extremely likely given the unprecedented demand. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, st dan said:

Yeah, surely there is no way they would have left themselves in such a precarious position and open to legal action for failing to fulfil orders, especially as supply issues were always going to be extremely likely given the unprecedented demand. 

Also especially as it’s not for profit either?

[Leyrulion]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

me, I reckon the Pharma company has the better lawyers for drawing up commercial contracts for pharma supplies. It's what they do every day.

Didn't it take the e.u. an extra two mo the to negotiate the contract? You'd hope they had some good lawyers!

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, xxialac said:

The EU, renowned for its technocrats and its (over?) attention to detail, doesn't have as good inhouse lawyers to put to work on something so absolutely critical?

are they experts in that industry though?

the fact the EU are threatening n exports ban makes me think they dont have a leg to stand on

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, xxialac said:

The EU, renowned for its technocrats and its (over?) attention to detail, doesn't have as good inhouse lawyers to put to work on something so absolutely critical?

I didn't say the EU lawyers would be crap, but procurement is a tiny tiny tiny part of the EUs spending while commercial supplies is just about solely what AZ do.

[xxialac]

Yeah, in agreement with those comments.

[Mr.Tease]

9 hours ago, Ryan1984 said:

Just ended up on the Daily Heil site to see how the enemy is reporting things and there are two big articles trying to encourage sympathy for Spaffer.

They and the Telegraph are just a s culpable as he is, they were actively campaigning for all the stupid decisions he made. It's like the aftermath of the Iraq war- so many journalists and pundits had pushed for and supported the invasion, they couldn't really hold the government of the day to account afterwards without indicting themselves.

[Ozanne]

27 minutes ago, xxialac said:

But we don't have a copy of the contract to confirm that. In fact the EU have asked them to publish it which suggest they are confident of their position.

It also comes down to the point if there are more vulnerable people in the continent that are in need of a vaccine isn’t there a morale duty to help those? I know they are in a different country but we are all humans so shouldn’t those vulnerable people be looked after. It was discussed a few days ago but I think it’s a valid discussion to be had. 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It also comes down to the point if there are more vulnerable people in the continent that are in need of a vaccine isn’t there a morale duty to help those?

if we're going the route of moral duty then the EU loses more of its supply, as well as the UK losing supplies. 😛 

But no govt is going to do that, simply because their own electorate don't want them to. Someone has to be first so it might as well be 'me'.

Edited January 28, 2021 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

if we're going the route of moral duty then the EU loses more of its supply, as well as the UK losing supplies. 😛 

But no govt is going to do that, simply because their own electorate don't want them to. Someone has to be first so it might as well be 'me'.

Im fine with the UK giving out spare vaccine doses. But their responsibility is the UK at the moment, so politically all governments needs to give priority to their own country's vaccination programme first. ( and this is the case for ALL countries)

[xxialac]

4 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It also comes down to the point if there are more vulnerable people in the continent that are in need of a vaccine isn’t there a morale duty to help those? I know they are in a different country but we are all humans so shouldn’t those vulnerable people be looked after. It was discussed a few days ago but I think it’s a valid discussion to be had. 

Obviously a matter of opinion and for sure this nationalistic approach serves the world poorly.

But I think given strained relations as they are, what would be best is to simply observe what it is states in both contracts. If there is insufficient supply, then it should be dished out to each party in exact proportions to their respective orders.

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

if we're going the route of moral duty then the EU loses more of its supply, as well as the UK losing supplies. 😛 

But no govt is going to do that, simply because their own electorate don't want them to. Someone has to be first so it might as well be 'me'.

Ha yeah true.

I know my point is idealistic and would never happen but I keep coming back to it in my head. 

[Boilingtent]

A contract exists solely as a mechanism to resolve all possible outcomes. There is no discussion to be had here just noise being made by the EU.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, Boilingtent said:

A contract exists solely as a mechanism to resolve all possible outcomes.

only true if the contract covers all possible outcomes.

When it doesn't it heads to court for resolution unless agreement can be made between the parties to cover the omissions.

Edited January 28, 2021 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

Yup

 

[zahidf]

7 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Obviously a matter of opinion and for sure this nationalistic approach serves the world poorly.

But I think given strained relations as they are, what would be best is to simply observe what it is states in both contracts. If there is insufficient supply, then it should be dished out to each party in exact proportions to their respective orders.

As Boris has stated (correctly) the dispute has nothing to do with the UK. If the UK conract states that AZ vaccines produced by them in their subcontracted factories goes to the UK first, why should they get involved?

[zahidf]

 

[xxialac]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Yup

 

I don't follow. The EU didn't contract the same order.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 minutes ago, xxialac said:

I don't follow. The EU didn't contract the same order.

It’s the exact same product though, isn’t it?

[Mellotr0n]

7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

As Boris has stated (correctly) the dispute has nothing to do with the UK. If the UK conract states that AZ vaccines produced by them in their subcontracted factories goes to the UK first, why should they get involved?

This. The EU are trying to drag the UK into this, when it's absolutely nothing to do with us. AstraZeneca have made it clear that part of the reason UK is getting a smoother supply is because we got the deal done months in advance, allowing plenty of time to sort supply chain issues.

The EU dithered and delayed, and what they were warned might happen has happened.

Edited January 28, 2021 by Mellotr0n