Press play to hear this article
European Commission officials on Monday reiterated a barrage of vague threats about blocking exports of the coronavirus vaccine, but could not explain what exactly they planned to do, when they planned to do it or how it would actually lead to more doses injected into the arms of EU citizens.
So, after another day of many more questions than answers about the EU’s slow vaccine campaign, only the following was clear: the continuing stumbling blocks in Brussels would not prevent the complaint between EU citizens and national leaders before a Virtual European Council summit on Thursday.
The threats from the Commission, which President Ursula von der Leyen first articulated last week, are nominally directed at the United Kingdom – the only vaccine producing country that has received doses produced on the European continent, but, as it appears, is not exporting no doses produced domestically.
The British government – and the British people – reacted angrily to the EU’s saber-rattling, and Prime Minister Boris Johnson reached out to his European counterparts who are trying to prevent any further restrictive measures that might pressure him to respond. Some allies are already calling for him to hold the fire, even if the EU takes action, to prevent the start of a trade war that could disrupt delicate supply chains.
But, at least for now, the Commission held its fire.
“Look, we are not going to speculate on the tools or the real details of what we could suggest to achieve the goals,” said Commission spokesman Eric Mamer. “Our problem, in fact, is with underperforming, insufficient delivery of vaccines compared to what is in our contracts with these companies and that is the problem that we want to solve – how to ensure that companies deliver in the EU according to the contract.”
But while Mamer, speaking at the regular midday press conference, referred to several companies, the Commission’s ire is now directed at just one: AstraZeneca, which is tens of millions of doses behind what it promised to deliver.
As a way of potentially correcting this gap, the Commission is studying the possibility of restricting exports of AstraZeneca vaccines manufactured at a factory in the Netherlands managed by a subcontractor, Halix. And on Monday, the Dutch authorities indicated that they would cooperate with the Commission’s decision to ban these exports.
But it is not clear whether this would help. Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton, responsible for the EU to increase vaccine production, said earlier that the Halix plant did not send doses to the UK, although that may have changed.
As a separate complication, the European Medicines Agency has not yet authorized the Halix factory to manufacture vaccines for the EU. The confusion seems to be a technical oversight that was as much the fault of the Commission for not insisting that AstraZeneca seek such authorization as it was the fault of the company for not doing so. That approval is in progress, said Mamer.
Mamer repeatedly insisted during Monday’s press conference that the Commission’s goals were simply to force vaccine manufacturers to follow EU purchasing agreements and obtain “reciprocity” from other vaccine producing countries that receive doses made in the EU – again, namely the United Kingdom
He defined reciprocity as the export of ready doses of vaccines or raw materials needed to make vaccines.
At the same time, it confirmed that, even if the Commission blocked exports, it did not currently have the legal authority to seize unshipped vaccines and reuse them for EU countries. Such a move would require additional emergency measures and could violate the rules of the World Trade Organization, as well as further undermine the EU’s reputation as a champion of free trade based on international rules.
“This is not about banning the export of vaccines,” said Mamer. “It is about ensuring that we are in a position to receive the vaccines planned for Europe”.
Journalists and some national officials were still wondering how the Commission would actually guarantee the delivery of the expected vaccines, something it has not yet been able to do with AstraZeneca. So far, the Commission has blocked only one consignment with Italy’s support – of AstraZeneca vaccines destined for Australia. On Monday, Mamer said the Commission did not know what happened to the 250,000 blocked doses and referred questions to the company.
EU leaders are expected to discuss the issue of vaccine exports during their video conference summit on Thursday. But, since they are not in person, they cannot take any immediate formal decision.
There has been some speculation that leaders, who are under increasing political pressure on the slow pace of vaccinations, may want to extend export bans to focus not only on AstraZeneca, but also on BioNTech / Pfizer, Moderna and potentially other producers that so far they have fulfilled their contractual commitments to the EU.
Such a move would not only attract the ire of companies, but also of other countries, including partners like Canada, Australia and Mexico, who are buying vaccines from EU manufacturers.
In issuing his new threats last week, von der Leyen offered a justification for blocking exports more broadly – a measure that, while controversial, may actually increase vaccination rates in the EU. Coincidentally, it can also boost Germany’s ruling Christian Democratic Union party in a year of super-election.
But other EU countries said they would oppose such an aggressive move, warning that von der Leyen’s incendiary approach was putting the EU’s reputation at risk in an attempt to play for a German audience.
“I am increasingly feeling as if we are all just part … of a German electoral piece,” said an EU diplomat.
Two EU diplomats said that only France and Italy clearly support a broader export ban, while Germany’s position remains unclear. And France was the only country to openly support this new high-risk approach.
“I support the announcements made by the President of the Commission … in particular to demand reciprocity,” said President Emmanuel Macron last week.
Officials in countries like Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands said they were against blocking vaccine exports from companies that were fulfilling their contracts.
With EU countries divided and leaders virtually meeting, it seemed unlikely that there would be a resolution to the debate this week.
Meanwhile, the previous effort by European Council President Charles Michel to challenge the UK to reveal how many doses it exported seemed overlooked amid the noise of the Commission’s threats – not to mention London’s warnings about the possibility of a trade war. harmful.
Emilio Casalicchio and Anna Isaac and contributed reporting.
This article is part of POLITICALpremium policy service from: Pro Health Care. From drug prices, EMA, vaccines, pharmaceuticals and more, our expert journalists keep you on top of the topics that drive the health policy agenda. The e-mail [email protected] for a free trial.