Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Enzokk

RobMc59 wrote: »

Yes,there are quite a few.

"World Health Organization scientists recommend Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine for all ages - ABC News" https://amp.abc.net.au/article/13142930

It is the same recommendation that a lot of countries has said apparently,

The 15-member Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) issued a range of interim recommendations for when and how to use the two-shot vaccine, which has yet to receive emergency use authorisation from the World Health Organization.

The announcement came after the vaccine has suffered several setbacks, raising questions about whether it was appropriate to use it for older people, or in places where a variant of the virus first found in South Africa is circulating.

SAGE chief Alejandro Cravioto acknowledged that there was a lack of data on the efficacy of the vaccine for people over the age of 65, which has prompted a number of countries to recommend against its use in older people.

But, he told journalists, "we feel that the response of this group cannot be any different from groups of a younger age".

AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine can be used for people aged over 65 - WHO

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

Because of Brexit they by default had to make their own deals for vaccines. It would have been an option anyway (one I don't believe anyone has taken) but being outside the EU meant they had to react to the situation and they have done.

So, by your own admission, it had nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit forced them into doing something they were quite capable of doing anyway.



Glad we finally agreed.

druss

Deleted User wrote: »

Because of Brexit they by default had to make their own deals for vaccines. It would have been an option anyway (one I don't believe anyone has taken) but being outside the EU meant they had to react to the situation and they have done.

Hungary has authorised the Sputnik vaccine on it's own and was considering a Chinese product. Germany was talking about authorising the Russian vaccine.

Member States have also taken differing internal approaches in how the vaccines are used.

Again, it should be crystal clear that, in an Irexit scenario, Ireland would have no negotiating leverage at all. In the EU, we can rely on centralised buying approach AND tweak with different products if we want to do so.

fly_agaric

tubercolossus wrote: »

'Abrogate' is a curious choice of words. It means cancel or abolish. They can't do that. They can 'trigger' it, ie the thing Brexiters are accusing the EU of which they didn't do. To actually do that would be a de facto declaration of economic war, and whatever it would be, an 'act of bravery' is not it.

I chose it deliberately.

If the UK go and use that emergency article over the kinds of problems NI is having since January 1st + stop the Customs checks/cooperating with the EU, IMO it is effectively junking the NI protocol.

I meant would require "courage" in the sense that from the rhetoric coming from Gove and Boris Johnson (and I think Iain Duncan Smith as well several months ago) about the NI Protocol, the Conservatives want to do it, but are scared of what might happen afterwards, which holds them back.

Calling it courage was not intended as praise.

I don't believe the fact that they would be breaking agreements with the EU (and Ireland as a member) matters to the faithless bunch in charge of the UK, so only fear of the consequences (for themselves and the UK in that order) stops them.

Leroy42

tubercolossus wrote: »

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1359590841619275776


Thread detailing the EU response to Gove's demands.

tl;dr We aren't changing anything that's not in the protocol. Institute all the many measures you agreed to do and which you haven't yet done, and we'll discuss what might in fact be possible.

Tony Connolly describes it as 'a hardline response' by Sefcovic.

That is some letter back. He basically tells the UK to sort itself out, align itself with the agreements it has already made, and that any issues they are facing are down to the UK itself.

RobMc59

Enzokk wrote: »

It is the same recommendation that a lot of countries has said apparently,



AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine can be used for people aged over 65 - WHO

The link I provided also says the WHO believes delaying the second jab up to twelve weeks is ok.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

The link I provided also says the WHO believes delaying the second jab up to twelve weeks is ok.

What the WHO believes about a vaccine that is still effectively at the experimental stage is irrelevant to Brexit. And besides, why are you citing the age recommendations for the only authorised vaccine that has so far been shown to have very limited usefulness against the South African variant, i.e. a variant to which Britain will be exposed soon enough.

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

That is some letter back. He basically tells the UK to sort itself out, align itself with the agreements it has already made, and that any issues they are facing are down to the UK itself.

So many references to specific commitments already made by the UK and not being honoured. One could almost believe that no-one in the administration read the agreement they signed up to ... but that'd be just plain silly, wouldn't it?

A Dub in Glasgo

I have been busy working and then enjoying the snow here, looked tonight and realised I was 15 pages behind on this thread, spent the last hour reading them and then realised it was groundhog day with one of the few Brexiter posters

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

On a different subject,the company I work for uses chemicals from Holland and Germany amongst others.They investigated sourcing them from the US but there are issues with transportation.At the beginning of January there was a short period of disruption to supply which did affect production at the facility.This has returned to normal now,with chemicals from all EU countries arriving on time,there are a number of chemicals now sourced from none EU countries however. Exports to EU countries have been unaffected.

It seems your positivity is not shared by the rest of industry. And maybe your company will actually do better because of Brexit, but clearly that is going to be the exception rather than the rule.

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1359559133196931072?s=19

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

What the WHO believes about a vaccine that is still effectively at the experimental stage is irrelevant to Brexit. And besides, why are you citing the age recommendations for the only authorised vaccine that has so far been shown to have very limited usefulness against the South African variant, i.e. a variant to which Britain will be exposed soon enough.

You're scrapping the barrel a bit there Celtic.It wasn't that long ago you and others were critising the UK because they weren't following WHO recommendations....

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

You're scrapping the barrel a bit there Celtic.It wasn't that long ago you and others were critising the UK because they weren't following WHO recommendations....

Rob, are you attributing the move to lengthen the time between doses to a considered and well thought out decision based on evidence, or simply just a risk that payed off?

Because you certainly seem to view as some kind of evidence of the success of the UK.

I welcome any good news, and it is good news and the UK gets the benefit of the gamble paying off. But let's be honest here, it was a gamble. A calculated one no doubt, but it might not have worked.

And I think their pathetic performance with Covid to that point, including the millions gifted in unchecked contracts to Tory donors, gave them little option but to gamble as the only chance to get something positive

They didn't follow the recommendations, as the WHO only recommended it today!

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

You're scrapping the barrel a bit there Celtic.It wasn't that long ago you and others were critising the UK because they weren't following WHO recommendations....

'Tweren't me ... my only contribution on the subject of SARS-CoV-2 on this thread has been to point out that it has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. And no matter how many times you resurrect the dead strawman of Article 16, it still doesn't. There are plenty of other threads where you can discuss the finer points of vaccine authorisations in general, and Britain's handling of the situation in particular.

In the meantime, what do you think the UK government should do about honouring it's commitments to safeguard plant and animal health, because those were Brexit promises? Do you think it's acceptable for the British administration to simply wave through consignments without the appropriate checks? Do you believe that demonstrates a willingness to engage constructively with it nearest trading partner?

Lemming

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

From seeing who Britain voted for as MEPs, especially over the last while, it looks like they never took seriously the notion of the European parliament and collaboration.

yagan wrote: »

Even remain voters didn't turn up for the last MEP elections, which were a clear opportunity to challenge the Brexit narrative.

I've not read the last two pages worth of posts yet so playing catch-up but just to comment on these two posts; I used to work with a card carrying brexiteer. Decent guy, got on well with him and we actively discussed politics and it was all civil and didn't come to blows. In fact, the _ONLY_ person I have ever heard give any sort of reasonable and plausible grievance with the EU that directly affected him - it should be mentioned it was easily dispelled but regardless it was plausible and relatively concrete, not regurgitation of the Daily Mail. The guy was otherwise quite up on current events, etc. and interested in the world around him.

So ... colour me surprised when upon asking him exactly who he thought he was voting for to represent him in the (then) recent european parliamentary elections, I was met with a "what? We have those?!" sort of response. It was not sarcasm. He was genuinely surprised to hear about it, which made me (and still does) wonder who he - and millions of other Britons - thought they were voting for at every MEP election cycle.

Now I have heard some wacky, wacky sh1t said regards the EU _before_ the referendum was ever a thing, but that revelation was a bit of a mindfvck to contemplate at the time as it suggested the levels of general public ignorance towards the EU were plumbing new levels I could not have imagined existed in the UK. Granted, the levels of public engagement in domestic politics in the UK is already at abysmal levels in general. So the poor calibre and poor turn-out of UK MEPs on foot of all of that does not surprise me in hindsight. The last decade of (lack of?) political discourse in the UK is also not helped by the Tories disengagement from the EU, starting under Dave Camerons watch and got progressively worse, reducing the UK governments reach & awareness of a) what was going on around them and b) how to work with the rest of the EU member nations, something that the UK representative to the EU was once considered extremely adept.

Strazdas

Lemming wrote: »

I've not read the last two pages worth of posts yet so playing catch-up but just to comment on these two posts; I used to work with a card carrying brexiteer. Decent guy, got on well with him and we actively discussed politics and it was all civil and didn't come to blows. In fact, the _ONLY_ person I have ever heard give any sort of reasonable and plausible grievance with the EU that directly affected him - it should be mentioned it was easily dispelled but regardless it was plausible and relatively concrete, not regurgitation of the Daily Mail. The guy was otherwise quite up on current events, etc. and interested in the world around him.

So ... colour me surprised when upon asking him exactly who he thought he was voting for to represent him in the (then) recent european parliamentary elections, I was met with a "what? We have those?!" sort of response. It was not sarcasm. He was genuinely surprised to hear about it, which made me (and still does) wonder who he - and millions of other Britons - thought they were voting for at every MEP election cycle.

Now I have heard some wacky, wacky sh1t said regards the EU _before_ the referendum was ever a thing, but that revelation was a bit of a mindfvck to contemplate at the time as it suggested the levels of general public ignorance towards the EU were plumbing new levels I could not have imagined existed in the UK. Granted, the levels of public engagement in domestic politics in the UK is already at abysmal levels in general. So the poor calibre and poor turn-out of UK MEPs on foot of all of that does not surprise me in hindsight. The last decade of (lack of?) political discourse in the UK is also not helped by the Tories disengagement from the EU, starting under Dave Camerons watch and got progressively worse, reducing the UK governments reach & awareness of a) what was going on around them and b) how to work with the rest of the EU member nations, something that the UK representative to the EU was once considered extremely adept.

If I remember correctly, the three or four referendum TV debates were watched by about 3m people each. We're talking about a completely apathetic and disinterested electorate : probably the most disengaged in politics in Europe.

By contrast, one of the French presidential TV debates in 2017 was three and a half hours long and had an average of 10m viewers on TF1.

Lemming

Strazdas wrote: »

If I remember correctly, the three or four referendum TV debates were watched by about 3m people each. We're talking about a completely apathetic and disinterested electorate : probably the most disengaged in politics in Europe.

By contrast, one of the French presidential TV debates in 2017 was three and a half hours long and had an average of 10m viewers on TF1.

I'd agree with the absolute lack of engagement here in England at any rate; can't speak for anywhere else in the UK and my opinions regards Scotland may be insulated somewhat by friends & family.

Ireland is by no means perfect and we have our own absolute headbanging lunatics and levels of ignorance to contend with, but at least at home there was always a sense that people knew that they were being asked to vote in a referendum, or national/local/european elections even if otherwise disengaged for whatever personal reason. But it seems to be on a whole other level here in England. The level of general awareness is quite poor regards domestic politics, never mind taking the EU into account. So many people just feel that their votes simply "don't matter". FPTP really seems to be falling apart under its own weight in the digital era or something. Or perhaps the Tories (aided by Labour) have simply figured out how to ruthlessly game the system. I dunno, but I suspect the whole adversarial "winner takes all" FPTP system is at the heart of the malaise.

Capt'n Midnight

druss wrote: »

Hungary has authorised the Sputnik vaccine on it's own and was considering a Chinese product. Germany was talking about authorising the Russian vaccine.

Member States have also taken differing internal approaches in how the vaccines are used.

Again, it should be crystal clear that, in an Irexit scenario, Ireland would have no negotiating leverage at all. In the EU, we can rely on centralised buying approach AND tweak with different products if we want to do so.

Iceland and other small countries joined the EU scheme reason for the collective barraging power. Which includes vaccines at cost or with liability.

The UK is an outlier because they are throwing money at the problem which is good, but bad because they have to, and worse if it's to distract from Brexit.

Israel is an outlier because they are using the population as guinea pigs to gain early access. Being cynical I'd suggest that the Ultra-orthodox and Palestinians could be used as control groups and that there is no way Ireland in the case of Irexit would have ever got this deal.

It will be interesting to see how the EU assists the vaccine roll out in Africa. Or how much of UK's overseas aids it will replace. Because that will erode the UK's soft power.

Strazdas

Lemming wrote: »

I'd agree with the absolute lack of engagement here in England at any rate; can't speak for anywhere else in the UK and my opinions regards Scotland may be insulated somewhat by friends & family.

Ireland is by no means perfect and we have our own absolute headbanging lunatics and levels of ignorance to contend with, but at least at home there was always a sense that people knew that they were being asked to vote in a referendum, or national/local/european elections even if otherwise disengaged for whatever personal reason. But it seems to be on a whole other level here in England. The level of general awareness is quite poor regards domestic politics, never mind taking the EU into account. So many people just feel that their votes simply "don't matter". FPTP really seems to be falling apart under its own weight in the digital era or something. Or perhaps the Tories (aided by Labour) have simply figured out how to ruthlessly game the system. I dunno, but I suspect the whole adversarial "winner takes all" FPTP system is at the heart of the malaise.

Yes, the quite disastrous FPTP system is almost certainly a big factor in the apathy.

I saw one UK commentator suggest during the week that England is a not very serious country. Obsessed with trivia and celebrity but bored stiff by anything heavy and which requires deep thought. It would certainly explain how the culture wars are able to run riot in a frivolous society : people obsessing over things like flags and symbols and poppies and 'taking the knee', but not engaging at all with the real issues.

Capt'n Midnight

Lemming wrote: »

I dunno, but I suspect the whole adversarial "winner takes all" FPTP system is at the heart of the malaise.

The adversarial system means that when the swingometer goes the other way the new government will burn time and money to undo the previous one's work before they can start their own positive programs.

You only get stable government programs if the same crowd keep getting re-elected and that can lead to corruption.

Here politics is boring because the parties have broadly similar aims (compared to Tory vs Labour) and the worst deviations form the median are kept in check by coalition partners.

All the same it's been impressive how much, apart from playing to the gallery, in lockstep our parties have been over Brexit.

Lemming

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, the quite disastrous FPTP system is almost certainly a big factor in the apathy.

I should imagine that FPTP has up until the latter half of the 20th century ensured a reasonable level of stability in the UK, so it's disappointing to see it creaking at the seams today. Maybe it always was bad but the digital age now means the cracks are being exposed and disseminated so publicly as to make any failings painfully apparent. Who knows; hindsight is a marvelous thing, foresight would be even better.

I saw one UK commentator suggest during the week that England is a not very serious country. Obsessed with trivia and celebrity but bored stiff by anything heavy and which requires deep thought. It would certainly explain how the culture wars are able to run riot in a frivolous society : people obsessing over things like flags and symbols and poppies and 'taking the knee', but not engaging at all with the real issues.

I read a byline to that effect a few days ago too; in essence that England wanted "excitement" from its politicians. As if it's a session of Strictly come-whatever or the local football terraces. When done right (i.e. competently) politics should be as boring AF because it would/should just be stable and mundane almost, not Fox news-entertainment (with the emphasis on "entertainment").

Vote for jokers; get jokers. It's that simple. Don't be surprised if they blow the budget on which you all have to live on red noses and silly shoes.

Strazdas

Lemming wrote: »

I should imagine that FPTP has up until the latter half of the 20th century ensured a reasonable level of stability in the UK, so it's disappointing to see it creaking at the seams today. Maybe it always was bad but the digital age now means the cracks are being exposed and disseminated so publicly as to make any failings painfully apparent. Who knows; hindsight is a marvelous thing, foresight would be even better.



I read a byline to that effect a few days ago too; in essence that England wanted "excitement" from its politicians. As if it's a session of Strictly come-whatever or the local football terraces. When done right (i.e. competently) politics should be as boring AF because it would/should just be stable and mundane almost, not Fox news-entertainment (with the emphasis on "entertainment").

Vote for jokers; get jokers. It's that simple. Don't be surprised if they blow the budget on which you all have to live on red noses and silly shoes.

Theories I've heard on this are a poor education system and a dumbed down media. Ironically, if they were to scrap the failed FPTP system, they would get far more 'exciting' politics, but the millionaires and toffs of the Tory Party will do everything to block this ever happening (end of their gravy train if multi party politics arrived).

Lemming

Strazdas wrote: »

Theories I've heard on this are a poor education system and a dumbed down media. Ironically, if they were to scrap the failed FPTP system, they would get far more 'exciting' politics, but the millionaires and toffs of the Tory Party will do everything to block this ever happening (end of their gravy train if multi party politics arrived).

I'm not sure how much of this can be laid at the door of the education system (or at least not as an origin point); I mean looking back at my own primary/secondary education through the 1980s and 1990s in Dublin, any real notions of awareness came from teachers discussing current events as an aside outside of planned curriculums.

I'd be looking more at a pliant media than the education system; to pull the education system apart you would first have to get into power and do that you need to get your name spread across the tv/radio/papers of the day.

Leroy42

So more positive Brexit news for the UK

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1359771273325404167?s=09

I assume the reaction by the mainstream UK media and Brexiteers will be to point out how relatively small it is and that jobs haven't been impacted, but as this thread points out

https://twitter.com/Sime0nStylites/status/1359761050200072192?s=19

It is the fact that business is shifting away at all that it the worry. London held a significant advantage over the rest of the EU and yet that now seems to be gone.

What plans are in place to restore these advantages?

druss

druss wrote: »

Again, it should be crystal clear that, in an Irexit scenario, Ireland would have no negotiating leverage at all. In the EU, we can rely on centralised buying approach AND tweak with different products if we want to do so.

How are Israel doing it?

Leroy42 wrote: »

So, by your own admission, it had nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit forced them into doing something they were quite capable of doing anyway.



Glad we finally agreed.

If they were still in the EU they'd be facing massive criticism for going outside of the EU apparatus to do what they're currently doing. As well as that, a pretty constant observation (including on here BTW) is that the UK don't seem to know what the EU actually does. Usually they think that following the EU is a requirement rather than an option. That they suddenly would have had clarity on this one particular issue isn't a given.

schmoo2k

Deleted User wrote: »

How are Israel doing it?.

They effectively volunteered to be a very large test group (Ireland could have done the same, but suspect we wouldn't have had the bottle for it after the Pandemrix issues).

ambro25

Leroy42 wrote: »

What plans are in place to restore these advantages?

Planetary-scale 'fiscal optimization' and related money-laundering services, at a guess?

The world is fast running out of tax havens through regulatory pressure and alignment.

Yet long-lasting financial crises and the worst pandemic in a century notwithstanding, the richest keep getting ever richer, ever faster (so economic media reports to us).

So the demand side is growing whilst the supply side is shrinking.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

'Tweren't me ... my only contribution on the subject of SARS-CoV-2 on this thread has been to point out that it has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. And no matter how many times you resurrect the dead strawman of Article 16, it still doesn't. There are plenty of other threads where you can discuss the finer points of vaccine authorisations in general, and Britain's handling of the situation in particular.

In the meantime, what do you think the UK government should do about honouring it's commitments to safeguard plant and animal health, because those were Brexit promises? Do you think it's acceptable for the British administration to simply wave through consignments without the appropriate checks? Do you believe that demonstrates a willingness to engage constructively with it nearest trading partner?

Apologies, I was referring to posts on another thread..
Regarding plant(?)and animal health,I would have preferred the UK to continue sticking to EU standards on everything tbh,and Cameron had told the brexiters where to go back in 2015/2016 and not indulge them with a referendum.
Back on plant health,I'd say if a consignment of Dutch plants/bulbs is a kilo over or a leaf is sticking out,a bit of common sense should be used.

ambro25

RobMc59 wrote: »

(...)
Back on plant health,I'd say if a consignment of Dutch plants/bulbs is a kilo over or a leaf is sticking out,a bit of common sense should be used.

Yeah?

So, er, back on planet earth...would you also say that someone should check whether that extra kilo in the consignment actually is extra Dutch plants/bulbs, rather than Columbia's finest recreational aid, or composition 4 blocks, or ...?

An appeal to 'common sense' tends to be the recourse of those incapable of understanding and following rules, when caught out. In context, common sense would rather be, to weigh the consignment before entering its weight in the paperwork, and to enter it correctly.

Don't worry, though: any exporters long-used to wink-and-a-nod paperwork are currently learning very fast. The learning curve is that steep, it's gone inverted.

redcup342

Deleted User wrote: »

How are Israel doing it?

Simple:
Country has military service, everybody is willing to follow orders.
They excluded the 4.8 million people living in the West Bank
Pharma wanted to see the results of a large rollout.

If they were still in the EU they'd be facing massive criticism for going outside of the EU apparatus to do what they're currently doing. As well as that, a pretty constant observation (including on here BTW) is that the UK don't seem to know what the EU actually does. Usually they think that following the EU is a requirement rather than an option. That they suddenly would have had clarity on this one particular issue isn't a given.

Of course they would, the whole basis of the EU is that it's a union.
They left the Union so that criticism would be unfounded now.

Getting a vaccine rolled out more quickly on the basis of having more money or having the producer in your country would go against the basis of that.

volchitsa

Deleted User wrote: »

If they were still in the EU they'd be facing massive criticism for going outside of the EU apparatus to do what they're currently doing. As well as that, a pretty constant observation (including on here BTW) is that the UK don't seem to know what the EU actually does. Usually they think that following the EU is a requirement rather than an option. That they suddenly would have had clarity on this one particular issue isn't a given.

So they wouldn't have done it because they feared criticism from the EU... but they chose to leave the EU and went ahead with that over a four year period ... and they didn't fear the criticism over that?? Sounds like chopping off your leg because you've an ingrown toenail.