No 10 and regulator contradict Hancock's 'because of Brexit' Covid vaccine claim

S

SirGalahad

Joined
1 Apr 2016
Messages
13,424
Reaction score
540
Country
United Kingdom
Sponsored Links
'The European Medicines Agency said its procedure was based on more evidence and required more checks than the emergency procedure chosen by Britain.'
 
Lower said:
'The European Medicines Agency said....
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the EU forbids its members to follow the kind of procedure the UK followed?



(spoiler: It doesn't)
 
SirGalahad said:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...helped-uk-to-speedy-approval-of-covid-vaccine

Hancock lying again? It can't be so.

Regulator doesn't agree with Health Secretary shocker. Matt Hancock: “Because we’ve left the EU, we’ve been able to move faster."

Dr June Raine, MHRA boss: “We’ve been able to authorise supply of this vaccine under provisions under European law which exist until January 1st.”
Click to expand...


All EU countries are entitled to do as we did. However. they made a collective decision not to do so because they feel the rollout should be at the same time for all 27 member states. Had we remained in the EU, we would have been bound by this decision and not been able to rollout the vaccine, 1 can move faster than 27.

The German health minister will kindly explain it to you here:

Bruno Waterfield on Twitter: ""We have member states including, Germany, who could have issued such an emergency authorisation if we'd wanted to. But we decided against this and what we opted for was a common European approach to move forward together."" / Twitter
 
Sponsored Links
fillyboy said:
we would have been bound by this decision and not been able to rollout the vaccine
Click to expand...

no we wouldn't.

We might have chosen to follow it though, unless we chose not to.
 
fillyboy said:
All EU countries are entitled to do as we did. However. they made a collective decision not to do so because they feel the rollout should be at the same time for all 27 member states. Had we remained in the EU, we would have been bound by this decision and not been able to rollout the vaccine, 1 can move faster than 27.

The German health minister will kindly explain it to you here:

Bruno Waterfield on Twitter: ""We have member states including, Germany, who could have issued such an emergency authorisation if we'd wanted to. But we decided against this and what we opted for was a common European approach to move forward together."" / Twitter
Click to expand...

But this one relies on some of the 27 to develop and produce the vaccine..

So if the UK was still part of the EU, it could have still decided to go on it's own and not collectively.

Asked twice at a later Downing Street press conference whether Brexit had played any role in speeding the process, Mr Johnson said only: “I think that’s really down to the Vaccine Task Force more than anything else, and the way that they organised it.”

Even No 10 didnt back Hancock. Perhaps Hancock needs his PPE Mates to provide him support?
 
Last edited:
Made in Belgium, aren't we lucky to have such a key trade partner on our doorstep.
 
SirGalahad said:
But this one relies on some of the 27 to develop and produce the vaccine..

So if the UK was still part of the EU, it could have still decided to go on it's own and not collectively.

Asked twice at a later Downing Street press conference whether Brexit had played any role in speeding the process, Mr Johnson said only: “I think that’s really down to the Vaccine Task Force more than anything else, and the way that they organised it.”

Even No 10 didnt back Hancock. Perhaps Hancock needs his PPE Mates to provide him support?
Click to expand...

Why can't you just celebrate that UK is the first country in Europe to roll out a vaccine and no, the member states have agreed to roll it out together, that's the decision that has been taken. We are not bound because we changed the relevant laws back in October.

Suck it up mate, you're wrong on this, the BBC are wrong on this. Listen to the German health minister, he's right.
 
fillyboy said:
We are not bound because we changed the relevant laws back in October.
Click to expand...
Total bovine excrement!

No nation in the EU is bound by any such decision, and that is written in the EU rules...

More scaremongering by pathetic brexiteers trying to justify the failure that is to come. The failure that they have voted for!
 
ellal said:
Total bovine excrement!
Click to expand...

ellal said:
No nation in the EU is bound by any such decision, and that is written in the EU rules...
Click to expand...

All 27 member states will have access to vaccines at the same time otherwise some member states may have have been able to procure vaccines at an earlier stage that others”

“We have member states including, Germany, who could have issued such an emergency authorisation if we’d wanted to. But we decided against this and what we opted for was a common European approach to move forward together.”
 
fillyboy said:
Why can't you just celebrate that UK is the first country in Europe to roll out a vaccine and no, the member states have agreed to roll it out together, that's the decision that has been taken. We are not bound because we changed the relevant laws back in October.

Suck it up mate, you're wrong on this, the BBC are wrong on this. Listen to the German health minister, he's right.
Click to expand...

The EU allow national approval of specific drugs and vaccines in the case of emergencies. What the German Health Minister says actually proves the point you are wrong.

27 could go one way and one could go another -we were part of the EU and kept Sterling.
Your are wrong as usual. The changes we made had no bearing.
 
According to Worldometer, c. 100k new cases of CV yesterday (not including the UK).

Would it not be a good time for the 27 to break ranks, and expedite authorisation of a vaccine?
Or, is a united front preferable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top