ChatterBank12 mins ago
The Brexiteers Are Continuing To Lie About The Vaccine Roll-Out
70 Answers
Just how many times do they have to be told that they are lying about the vaccine roll-out?
When will the Brexiteers stop telling lies in support of their failed pet project?
There are even ABers who believe these Brexiteer lies.
When will the Brexiteers stop telling lies in support of their failed pet project?
There are even ABers who believe these Brexiteer lies.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Clare, you forget the pressure the EU exerts to stick to their party line an d not to act independently,
Again from memory one of the problems for the EU was that Pfizer had difficulty initially in ramping up production to meet their needs for a fast rollout.
I am convinced it was the EU's anti British views post Brexit that produced their antipathy to The Astra-Zenecas being more widely used in their own rollout
Again from memory one of the problems for the EU was that Pfizer had difficulty initially in ramping up production to meet their needs for a fast rollout.
I am convinced it was the EU's anti British views post Brexit that produced their antipathy to The Astra-Zenecas being more widely used in their own rollout
Naomi, you need to read this:
https:/
https:/
https:/
this was invoked by EU, albeit briefly, to stop UK getting vaccines that they had a contract for getting Pfizer vaccine.
So yes, covid vaccination was effected by Brexit, but most specifically by the EU's attitude
this was invoked by EU, albeit briefly, to stop UK getting vaccines that they had a contract for getting Pfizer vaccine.
So yes, covid vaccination was effected by Brexit, but most specifically by the EU's attitude
//‘ the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has been free, under regulation 174, to give temporary approval to an unlicensed medicinal product in the case of certain types of public health threat, such as a pandemic’//
I'm not disputing that at all, Zacs. What I'm suggesting is that, had we still been EU members, despite that freedom in theory, in practice it would not have happened. None of the 27 EU members went it alone and that's because the EU Commission made it quite clear that development, approval and rollout was to be on an EU-wide basis. There was no accommodation for lone wolves.
I'm not disputing that at all, Zacs. What I'm suggesting is that, had we still been EU members, despite that freedom in theory, in practice it would not have happened. None of the 27 EU members went it alone and that's because the EU Commission made it quite clear that development, approval and rollout was to be on an EU-wide basis. There was no accommodation for lone wolves.
// there's every probability that [UK death] figures may have been much higher without it //
The UK approved the vaccine 19 days before the EU did. And our number of deaths is higher than everyone else.
UK 226,27 deaths
France 167,61 deaths
Germany 174,35 deaths
Italy 190,78 deaths
Spain 121,62 deaths
The UK approved the vaccine 19 days before the EU did. And our number of deaths is higher than everyone else.
UK 226,27 deaths
France 167,61 deaths
Germany 174,35 deaths
Italy 190,78 deaths
Spain 121,62 deaths
// Indeed it is. See Webbo's link. //
I did. And I've explained why the four links I've provided address that point: von der Leyen is in effect speaking after the choice has been made to cooperate.
As to those saying that we would have been sucked in to the EU's approach had we stayed inside, there are two points:
1. We can hardly know this for certain, given that this is a counterfactual. It's clearly possible. But as explained above it would have been a choice the UK could make, o not; and it would hardly be the fist time that we'd gone our own way (see eg Euro, Schengen, a few other opt-outs, etc.)
2. Perhaps most importantly, though, this is a completely different point from the one that Hancock made to start with, and that was propagated since by the speaker in the interview sampled in the video. Political pressures may or may not have led the UK to taking a different path; but as a legal question -- as a matter of EU regulations -- it's unambiguously wrong to claim that Brexit freed us from them in this instance.
I did. And I've explained why the four links I've provided address that point: von der Leyen is in effect speaking after the choice has been made to cooperate.
As to those saying that we would have been sucked in to the EU's approach had we stayed inside, there are two points:
1. We can hardly know this for certain, given that this is a counterfactual. It's clearly possible. But as explained above it would have been a choice the UK could make, o not; and it would hardly be the fist time that we'd gone our own way (see eg Euro, Schengen, a few other opt-outs, etc.)
2. Perhaps most importantly, though, this is a completely different point from the one that Hancock made to start with, and that was propagated since by the speaker in the interview sampled in the video. Political pressures may or may not have led the UK to taking a different path; but as a legal question -- as a matter of EU regulations -- it's unambiguously wrong to claim that Brexit freed us from them in this instance.
Gromit might want to have a read of this before he answers…..
https:/
https:/
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.