The contract with AstraZeneca is online

crappy_ninja · 2021-01-29T13:10:05+00:00

The only thing I've learned from the contract is I could never be a lawyer. How do you people stay focused while reading page after page of that?

ApresMatch · 2021-01-29T11:17:59+00:00

Somebody read it all and tell me who is right and who is wrong so I can get appropriately indignant.

Constant-Pen-1352 · 2021-01-29T14:41:04+00:00

If anyone's curious theres unredacted text in this: https://textuploader.com/184ka

Juicy parts: The cost is 870 million euros, Member states pay a bit of the fee, Astra can't make money, theres a 20% buffer for error. The cost can go up after July 1st. There are some liability waivers (basically so long as its not intentional)

So whoever published the pdf on the eu website forgot to remove the table of contents and i extracted the text from there so there are some symbols and whatnot but there's quite a bit of unredacted text in it.

BillMurray2020 · 2021-01-29T11:20:13+00:00

It's been 6 minutes FFS, someone tell me what to think?

JonnyArtois · 2021-01-29T13:04:49+00:00

I AM OUTRAGED, ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED.

I cannot be arsed to read it, but I AM OUTRAGED!

shizzmynizz · 2021-01-29T15:55:32+00:00

Time to sort by controversial.

EDIT: Fckin hell.

CaptainVaticanus · 2021-01-29T11:37:09+00:00

Rights lads get ur law degrees out

shozy · 2021-01-29T12:19:51+00:00

This proves I’m right!

No, I haven’t read it, why do you ask?

st36 · 2021-01-29T13:58:48+00:00

The document isn't redacted properly and shows the price to be €870m for 300m doses, so €2.90/dose.

throwbackfinder · 2021-01-29T11:15:41+00:00

“How many and how much does it cost?”

[Redacted]

English-Breakfast · 2021-01-29T11:23:17+00:00

My message would be that it's best to let the lawyers of the world read this before making any conclusions, instead of relying on the interpretation of random redditors. I mean, I doubt I'm clever enough to understand all the legal jargon.

Honestly though I doubt there's a smoking gun in there which solves the issue.

Fraktalt · 2021-01-29T11:55:24+00:00

Damn, so many strong opinions in this thread even though it's just been published and big parts of it is barely eligible between all the redacted parts. Maybe let the lawyers sort it out and whoever is right, is right.

ThunderousOrgasm · 2021-01-29T13:28:52+00:00

I just hope this means we can cool down our indignant rage from all sides and get back to fighting our real shared enemy, Covid!

DoingIsLearning · 2021-01-29T19:15:59+00:00

The same, but unredacted:

https://fragdenstaat.de/dokumente/8409-apa_-_astrazeneca/

...because PDF metada is black sourcery for EC staff.

TurquioseOrange · 2021-01-29T14:07:35+00:00

God, I'm glad I'm not a lawyer

berotti · 2021-01-29T13:02:54+00:00

Can we all take a deep breath and remember that AZ is still going to be producing 100 million doses a month for no profit, and that we will all still probably be vaccinated before most of the developing world?

intergalacticspy · 2021-01-29T13:37:22+00:00

[Disclaimer: I am an English and not a Belgian lawyer.]

Section 5.1 governs the "Initial Europe Doses" and requires them to be produced within the EU ~~only~~[in the first place].

Section 5.4 governs the "Vaccine" in general and requires it to be produced within the EU+UK or (subject to certain conditions) non-EU locations.

Section 5.1 is the more specific clause, and therefore governs (in accordance with the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant). The Initial Europe Doses must therefore must be produced within the EU ~~only~~[in the first place].

13.1(e) reinforces this by guaranteeing that there is no competing contract over the Initial Europe Doses. Which only makes sense if each country's supply is segregated, i.e. the EU's initial dose is produced only within the EU, and the UK's initial dose is produced only within the UK.

Subsequent orders after the 300 million Initial Europe Doses (such as the 100 million Optional Doses) can be produced in the UK or (subject to certain conditions) other non-EU countries.

[Edit: It has been pointed out that Schedule A appears to list sites for the Initial Europe Doses across the EU and UK. However, they are redacted, so it is unclear whether these sites are AZ sites or potential CMO sites. Most probably they are AZ sites, but we don't know for sure. If there are UK AZ sites identified for production of the IEDs, then it throws everything into confusion, because that would contradict section 5.1. Either 5.1 should have read "EU & UK" or Schedule A should have read "Initial Europe Doses & Optional Doses". Not clear how the contradiction would be resolved, but section 18.1(d) provides that the Agreement prevails over the attachments.]

[Edit 2: After much debate, I would still say that:

There is clearly a preference for the IEDs to come from a dedicated EU supply chain. I don't believe VDL when she says that the intention was always to use UK sites as the main supply. It really isn't compatible with the words of s 5.1 and the warranty in 13.1(e), given what the parties knew about the UK contracts. She is also clearly wrong when she says that the delivery schedule is a hard obligation and not simply a Best Reasonable Efforts obligation.
I do accept that UK sites can be used as a backup under s 5.4 for IEDs as well as later orders if the EU sites fall short. But whether AZ is obliged to do so depends on an interpretation of the Best Reasonable Efforts clause, which acknowledges that this is a global pandemic. The fact that both parties knew that AZ had other contracts outside the EU would therefore also be relevant.]

magincourts · 2021-01-29T14:57:22+00:00

Bit late on this, but there are a lot of people very selectively quoting. For me as much as anyone else I wanted to pull together the definitions and key elements. Trying to give the most reasonable overview I can. Please refer to the actual contract first and foremost for any queries you might have.

Initial disclaimers: 1. I have no legal training or experience with contract law. 2. I am British and would quite like to get the vaccine as soon as possible. 3. I am human and would quite like for everyone else to get the vaccine as soon as possible too.

In the recitals at the beginning we have a definition of the EU as the European Union (page 1). This is obvious, but potentially key later on.

We also have (page 2):

WHEREAS, as part of that scale-up, AstraZeneca has committed to use its Best Reasonable Efforts (as defined below) to build capacity to manufacture 300 million Doses of the Vaccine, at no profit and no loss to AstraZeneca, at the total cost currently estimated to be -REDACTED- Euros for distribution within the EU -REDACTED- (the "Initial Europe Doses"), with an option for the Commission, acting on behalf of the Participating Member States, to order an additional 100 million Doses (the "Optional Doses").

So here we can see 'Best Reasonable Efforts', and 'Initial Europe Doses' being discussed. These are the key bits. 'Best Reasonable Efforts' is outlined in the Definitions (page 3) as:

1.9. "Best Reasonable Efforts" means

(a) in the case of AstraZeneca, the activities and degree of effort that a company of similar size with a similarly-sized infrastructure and similar resources as AstraZeneca would undertake or use in the development and manufacture of a Vaccine at the relevant stage of development or commercialization having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world but taking into account efficacy and safety; and

(b) in the case of the Commission and the Participating Member States, the activities and degree of effort that governments would undertake or use in supporting their contractor in the development of the Vaccine having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world.

Nothing particularly ground-breaking there either.

Now, skipping ahead to page 11 and section 5. Manufacturing and Supply.

5.1 deals with the Initial Europe Doses, 5.2. the Optional Doses, 5.3 the Additional Doses, and 5.4 discusses the Manufacturing Sites. The Initial Europe Doses and the Optional Doses were discussed above in the recitals. What the EU and AZ are currently arguing about is the Initial Europe Doses (first 300million). The Optional Doses and Additional Doses sections do not contain information of interest, but I have noted their presence here firstly to explain what is being discussed between the key sections (5.1 and 5.4), and secondly because they make clear that provision is included beyond the Initial Europe Doses. In fact, the Optional Doses for 100million doses are an option for the EU. AZ must comply with this within certain constraints (e.g. notice must be given from the EU). The Additional Doses are to be considered 'in good faith' and therefore AZ are not obliged to supply these.

Into the key parts now:

5.1 Initial Europe Doses. AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Initial Europe Doses within the EU for distribution, and to deliver to the Distribution Hubs, following EU marketing authorization, as set forth more fully Section 7.1, approximately -REDACTED- 2020 - REDACTED- Q1 2021, and (iii) the remainder of the Initial Europe Doses by the end of -REDACTED-.

From here we can infer the Initial Europe Doses are split into multiple delivery arrangements. Using general news as a source, it seems 100million of the 300million were to be delivered by Q1 2021 (end of March). Note, Section 7.1 discusses what the Commission is due to fund. It states the funding is for i) 'sufficient drug substance, filling, and finishing capacity in Europe' (I note here that Europe is not a defined term) ii) 'advance supply of critical components to supply finished Vaccine', and iii) 'fill, finish, and package the Vaccine for distribution'. The funding is to be equal to the estimated cost of goods for the Initial Europe Dose, the value of which is of course redacted.

The next key part:

5.4 Manufacturing Sites. AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which, for the purpose of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) and may manufacture the Vaccine in non-EU facilities, if appropriate, to accelerate supply of the Vaccine in Europe; provided, that AstraZeneca shall provide prior written notice of such non-EU manufacturing facilities to the Commission which shall include an explanation for such determination to use non-EU manufacturing facilities. If AstraZeneca is unable to deliver on its intention to manufacture the Initial Europe Doses and/or Optional Doses under this Agreement in the EU, the Commission or the Participating Member States may present to AstraZeneca, CMOs within the EU capable of manufacturing the Vaccine Doses, and AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to contract with such proposed CMOs to increase the available manufacturing capacity within the EU. The manufacturing site planning is set out in Schedule A.

A CMO is a Contract Manufacturing Organization which takes on contracts to produce pharmaceuticals on someone else's behalf. Schedule A (pages 39 and 40 of the PDF - not in the contract, but page 5 of the Order Form) is titled 'Total Cost of Goods'. It gives the total cost of goods for the Initial Europe Doses (which is redacted). The breakdown of this cost is discussed later on. The next part mentions 'Drug substance manufacturing at -REDACTED- (FR/BE), -REDACTED- (I/IL), -REDACTED- (UK), and -REDACTED- (UK). -REDACTED- (ITL). -REDACTED-' and also 'Drug product manufacturing at -REDACTED- (ITL), -REDACTED- (DE), -REDACTED- (UK) and potential other suppliers.' It goes on to say that for the Initial Europe Doses being delivered to the Commission/Participating Member States, it will provide the names of the contracted suppliers. It then goes on to detail the breakdown of costs (heavily redacted) and details the Estimated Delivery Schedule (again, heavily redacted).

These are all of the relevant facts.

No one asked for it, but here is my non-qualified interpretation:

The phrase 'Best Reasonable Effort' is used consistently, and is defined. The AZ CEO was clearly right about this. I might be missing a specific sentence where this phrase was not used, but I can't see why the EU (was it UvdL?) claimed this phrase was not in the agreement.

In the recitals, the EU is defined as the European Union. This definition is to be used in all aspects of the contract except where otherwise stated.

The first key section (5.1) relates to the supply of the Initial Europe Doses and says 'AZ shall... manufacture the Initial Europe Doses within the EU'. Using the given definition, this says the first 300million doses are to be manufactured within the EU-27.

The next key section (5.4) says AZ will use its best efforts to manufacture inside the EU, but where it can't it will seek permission from the Commission to supply from a non-EU country, or the Commission or Member States can suggest pharma contractors within the EU who could reasonably manufacture for AZ. The big contention point here is the additional clarification of the term 'EU': "the EU (which, for the purpose of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom)".

This means that the UK is considered one of the supplying countries. This is confirmed in Section A of the Order Form where the countries of the manufacturers are listed and the UK appears on both the list of substance manufacturers and product manufacturers. Do note that the Order Form is not part of the contract as far as a I'm aware, so any terms defined here (explicitly or implicitly) may not have any bearing on the definition of terms in the contract (as in 18.1(d)).

However, the definition in 5.4 of EU as EU-27+UK is specified to only apply to 5.4, meaning the definition of EU in 5.1 (regarding who manufactures the Initial Europe Doses) defers to the original definition in the recitals: the EU is the European Union (i.e. EU-27 not inclusive of the UK). The 5.4 EU definition seems only to mean the UK isn't treated as a non-EU country when it comes to manufacturing site approval.

To conclude, UK is listed both in the contract and the Order Form as a supplier of this vaccine to the EU, but by the stipulations, the Initial Europe Doses are explicitly defined as being supplied from the EU-27. If the EU and AZ were to agree, AZ has the option to supply from the UK, and in the event AZ might not reach its Best Reasonable Effort, then it can ask permission to supply from outside the EU-27+UK, or the EU can offer up its own alternative EU-based CMOs.

The Order Form seems to relate only to the Initial Europe Doses, and lists the UK as a supplier. If I only read that document, I'd assume the UK is part supplying the EU at this stage. Key points are 1. the Order Form is redacted so much as to remove any certainty to its content. 2. the contract is the binding document, not the Order Form. 3. The Order Form states AZ will inform the EU who the manufacturers are. Vaccine has been supplied now, so AZ will have given the list of manufacturers to the EU. This list is a key document we don't have access to.

Please feel free to disagree with my layman's understanding and please do point out if I've missed any important part of the contract.

EN-Esty · 2021-01-29T14:41:30+00:00

This is my take regarding the confusion between 5.1 and 5.4:

Essentially, 5.1. states that AZ must manufacture the initial doses in the EU (excl. UK), whilst 5.4. states that if AZ chose to they could also manufacture in the UK plant without seeking further approval from the EU, whereas they would need additional permission if they were to manufacture in India for example. This does not, however, mean that they must manufacture EU doses in the UK as the UK is excluded from 5.1., and may in fact mean they are contractually obligated not to produce any of the initial 300m doses in the UK.

I believe the reason AZ included this clause (5.4.) is that once the UK contract is fulfilled they want to be able to send doses from its UK facilities to the EU without seeking further approval. This tallies with what the AZ CEO has said about intending to send doses from the UK facilities to the EU at a later date.

In the EU agreement it is mentioned that the manufacturing sites in the UK were an option for Europe, but only later. But we’re moving very quickly, the supply in the UK is very rapid. The government is vaccinating two and a half million people a week, about 500.000 a day, our vaccine supply is growing quickly. As soon as we have reached a sufficient number of vaccinations in the UK, we will be able to use that site to help Europe as well.

-AZ CEO

joydivisions1 · 2021-01-29T15:02:37+00:00

Clause 5.4 says "may" and "if appropriate," not "should" or "will."

Purposefully non-committal.

5.4 is titled manufacturing sites and is to allow vaccines produced in the UK to be treated as equal to those produced in the EU, whereas vaccines from elsewhere would need to be approved by the EU.

There is absolutely no commitment to use UK sites.

sonicandfffan · 2021-01-29T13:51:11+00:00

Credit to u/gemushka for their post on r/coronavirusUK that extracts the relevant sections.

1.9. “Best Reasonable Efforts” means

(a) in the case of AstraZeneca, the activities and degree of effort that a company of similar size with a similarly-sized infrastructure and similar resources as AstraZeneca would undertake or use in the development and manufacture of a Vaccine at the relevant stage of development or commercialization having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world but taking into account efficacy and safety; and

(b) in the case of the Commission and the Participating Member States, the activities and degree of effort that governments would undertake or use in supporting their contractor in the development of the Vaccine having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world.

Section 5 Manufacturing and Supply

5.1 Initial Europe Doses: AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Initial Europe Doses within the EU for distribution, and to deliver to the Distribution Hubs, following EU marketing authorization, as set forth more fully in Section 7.1, approximately [redacted] 2020 [redacted] Q1 2021, and (iii) the remainder of the Initial Europe Doses by the end of [redacted].

5.4 Manufacturing Sites: AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which, for the purpose of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) and may manufacture the Vaccine in non-EU facilities, if appropriate, to accelerate supply of the Vaccine in Europe; provided, that AstraZeneca shall provide prior written notice of such non-EU manufacturing facilities to the Commission which shall include an explanation for such determination to use non-EU manufacturing facilities. If AstraZeneca is unable to deliver on its intention to manufacture the Initial Europe Doses and/or Optional Doses under this Agreement in the EU, the Commission or the Participating Member States may present to AstraZeneca, CMOs within the EU capable of manufacturing the Vaccine Doses, and AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to contract with such proposed CMOs to increase the available manufacturing capacity within the EU. The manufacturing site planning is set out in Schedule A.

5.5. Reporting. AstraZeneca shall notify the Commission as soon as (a) it selects initial manufacturing sites and (b) it changes any of its manufacturing sites for the Vaccine.

6.2. Capacity Limitations. In the event AstraZeneca's ability to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement is impeded by a competing agreement entered into by or on behalf of the Commission, AstraZeneca shall promptly inform the Commission. While AstraZeneca shall continue to use Best Reasonable Efforts to engage with its own contract manufacturers and suppliers to utilize the capacity and/or components, the Commission will assist in finding a mutually acceptable solution for this Agreement and the competing agreement. To the extent AstraZeneca’s performance under thisAgreement is impeded by any such competing agreements, AstraZeneca shall not be deemed in breach of this Agreement as a result of any such delay due to the aforementioned competing agreement(s).

I won't comment on any of these clauses or my conclusions here, I'll just leave them for debate. But I will note:

6.2 refers to competing agreements signed into by the EU, not by AZ.
The inclusion of the UK as a manufacturing site is very specifically limited to clause 5.4.

SatanicBiscuit · 2021-01-29T17:57:39+00:00

sort by controversial

grabs popcorn

soyuzonions · 2021-01-29T12:15:52+00:00

i dont even need law degrees because astra zeneca is swedish so theyre automatically good.

KGeedora · 2021-01-29T12:16:32+00:00

This is more confusing than Leo Messi's Barça contract fiasco.

Lumpenstein · 2021-01-29T16:55:01+00:00

Why are all the key-dates and numbers censored ? 😡

crikeyboy · 2021-01-29T11:17:02+00:00

I'll try to pick out key points, removed any emphasis to avoid confusion

Manufacturing and supply

AstraZeneca shall use its best reasonable efforts to manufacture the initial Europe doses within the EU for distribution, and to deliver to the distribution hubs following market authorisation. Approximately [redacted] doses.

Best Reasonable Efforts

(a) in the case of AstraZeneca, the activities and degree of effort that a company of similar size with a similarly-sized infrastructure and similar resources as AstraZeneca would undertake or use in the development and manufacture of a Vaccine at the relevant stage of development or commercialization having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world but taking into account efficacy and safety; and (b) in the case of the Commission and the Participating Member States, the activities and degree of effort that governments would undertake or use in supporting their contractor in the development of the Vaccine having regard to the urgent need for a Vaccine to end a global pandemic which is resulting in serious public health issues, restrictions on personal freedoms and economic impact, across the world.

Allocation

(a) No later than [redacted] following the Effective Date, the Commission shall deliver to AstraZeneca a final and binding written allocation of Initial Europe Doses between the Participating Member States (the “Binding Allocation”), which Initial Europe Doses must equal 300 million. The number of Initial Europe Doses set forth in the Binding Allocation shall be the total number of Initial Europe Doses that each Participating Member State is required to purchase pursuant to this Agreement. (b) In the event that the Commission does not provide a Binding Allocation within the [redacted] period or the number of Doses set forth in the Binding Allocation does not equal 300 million, then, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Commission and AstraZeneca, the binding allocation of the Initial Europe Doses shall be made on a pro-rata basis to reflect the respective populations of each of the Participating Member States utilizing the population estimate as of 10 July 2020 reported by the statistical office of the European Union, Eurostat. In the event there is an excess of supply of the Initial Europe Doses and Optional Doses, the Participating Member States shall keep their shared rights in the Initial Europe Doses, and shall determine their best use of such excess doses, reserving the possibility to donate them to lower or middle income countries or public institutions and to donate or resell, at no profit, such doses to other European countries that agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement applicable to a Participating Member State.

Capacity Limitations

In the event AstraZeneca's ability to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement is impeded by a competing agreement entered into by or on behalf of the Commission, AstraZeneca shall promptly inform the Commission. While AstraZeneca shall continue to use Best Reasonable Efforts to engage with its own contract manufacturers and suppliers to utilize the capacity and/or components, the Commission will assist in finding a mutually acceptable solution for this Agreement and the competing agreement. To the extent AstraZeneca’s performance under this Agreement is impeded by any such competing agreements, AstraZeneca shall not be deemed in breach of this Agreement as a result of any such delay due to the aforementioned competing agreement(s).

Resolution.

(a) In the event of a dispute arising under this Agreement between the Parties, the Parties shall first refer such dispute to informal dispute resolution discussions between their respective Executive Officers. AstraZeneca, on the one hand, or the Commission, on the other hand on behalf of the Commission or the applicable Participating Member State, may initiate such informal dispute resolution by sending written notice of the dispute to the other Party, and, within twenty (20) days of such notice, the Executive Officers shall meet and attempt to resolve the dispute by good faith negotiations. (b) Each of the Commission, the Participating Member States and AstraZeneca irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in Brussels, Belgium to settle any dispute which may arise under or in connection with this Agreement or the legal relationships established by this Agreement.

CluelessFounder · 2021-01-29T11:46:21+00:00

Apart from 5.4 that also mentions UK sites for manufacturing, i also find this bit interesting:

13.1. AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca represents, warrants and covenants to the Commission and the Participating Member States that:

(e) it is not under any obligation, contractual or otherwise,to any Person or third party in respect of the Initial Europe Doses or that conflicts with or is inconsistent in any material respect with the terms of this Agreement or that would impede the complete fulfillment of its obligations under this Agreement;

So they signed this agreement, knowing that it violates the prior signed UK agreement? Seems like AZ needs to take the blame for this one.

Uschnej · 2021-01-29T11:45:30+00:00

So much has been censored. You can say if something is in the contract, but not that something is not.

5.1, 5.4, 13.1 b & e are still relevant, but all the stuff in schedule A is gone.

Negcellent · 2021-01-29T14:31:15+00:00

I want to preclude this by saying that I am in no way anti-EU. If I had my way we would still be in the union, and I am not a brigading from r/britainbad or whatever it is.

Speaking on Belgian radio, he said: "The EU commission has pushed to co-ordinate the vaccines contracts on behalf of the 27 precisely to avoid a vaccines war between EU countries, but maybe the UK wants to start a vaccine war?

"Solidarity is an important principle of the EU. With Brexit, it's clear that the UK doesn't want to show solidarity with anyone."

The above was a statement made by the EU Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders on Belgian radio.

The UK government, for all it's fuck ups (of which there are plenty) has nothing to do with this situation.

The UK placed orders with AZ, the EU placed orders with AZ. Both parties should receive their promised doses. So why is this individual trying to stoke tensions further by blaming the UK as a nation, rather than AZ as a private company, independent of any government?

Fast-Highlight4731 · 2021-01-29T12:03:36+00:00

“Shows the reserved manufacturing and production schedule to support earliest possible delivery of Doses to the Participating Member States. Final delivery subject to agreement of delivery schedule and regulatory approval”

My bold

Obligatory not a lawyer, but what does this bit mean? Is it referring to regulatory approval of the vaccine by the EMA?

subr0utine · 2021-01-29T13:32:00+00:00

Well, most of the lines in the contact are dredacted.

zip2k · 2021-01-29T13:59:04+00:00

Can anyone interpret what it means when UK plants are mentioned in 5.4 but not 5.1? It seems like 5.4 should cover what is said in 5.1, so I'm not too sure about what the point of 5.1 really is?

soefjalfkja · 2021-01-29T22:17:56+00:00

This is the deal that France , Germany, Italy and the Netherlands had with AstraZeneca that was taken over by the EU . That deal was for 300 a 400 million vaccines. I doubt the Eu would order more so it has to be that deal .

That Deal was published as required by the Dutch government on 13-06-2020

If that deal was published by the Dutch government on 13-06-2020 what did the Eu do or didnt do until august?!

Zlimness · 2021-01-30T00:22:21+00:00

Instead of arguing if the UK plants were a part of the agreement or not, maybe people should be asking why AstraZeneca suddenly cut the supply by 60% and how this is considered "best reasonable effort". What's the reason for underdelivering to such a degree? AstraZeneca was supposed to deliver 80 million doses the first quarter, but instead the EU is only getting 36 million doses now. What happened to other 44 million doses? How is it possible to get your production numbers that wrong?

I have a lot of theories about the rest of contract, but I don't know the actual facts. However, the wording about the UK facilities seem blown out of proportions. The real problem is why AZ are so far off what they should've delivered.

Topic	Schedule
What do you know about... ?	Tuesday
r/Europe question of the week	Saturday
The news in your country	Sunday

Subreddit	Subject
r/EuropeMeta	Meta discussion
r/AskEurope	Questions
r/CasualEurope	Casual [no politics] conversations focused around Europe.
r/esa	European Space Agency
r/EUpersonalfinance	Finance advice
r/Eurovision	Europe Song contest
r/Eureddision	Reddit Song contest
r/Europes	Curated discussion
r/Europeans	In-depth content
r/EuroPics	Pictures
r/EuropeanCulture	Culture
r/EuropeanParliament	EU Parliament
r/EuropeanUnion	EU content
r/EuropeanFederalists	Federal Europe
/r/EuropeEats	European food
r/EUlaw	EU legal aspects
r/EuroPrivacy	Privacy in Europe
r/Europa	The moon
r/YUROP	STRONK!
r/cscareerquestionsEU	CS Career Questions in Europe

europe

Events

Rules on photo posts

Related Subreddits

Header Image

Some local European subreddits

MODERATORS