The Brexiteers Are Continuing To Lie About The Vaccine Roll-Out

[Hymie]

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.

[Khandro]

Yawn !

[naomi24]

Hymie, it would be good if you'll tell us what you're talking about rather than expecting us to find out by watching cheap videos.

[Hymie]

Naomi24, if you are really totally unaware of this continuing Brexiteer lie – you really should watch the video, and educate yourself.

[naomi24]

I don't come here to watch videos, hymie. Too time consuming.

[ClareTG0ld]

It's based on the claim (made by Matt Hancock, and subsequently propagated) that vaccine approval was faster precisely because of Brexit. This is, however, not correct.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/covid-vaccine-decisions-brexit

https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-vaccine-brexit/

https://www.bbc.com/news/55163730

In particular, it was refuted by the Government at the time:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-mhra-statement

[Rosetta]

But the Astra-Zeneca vaccine was the first to be administered in the UK, while the EU were still arguing about it, and before Pfizer was rolled out. If I remember correctly, Pfizer was the preferred option of the EU, and they were still arguing about the terms of its distribution when UK started using Astra- Zeneca

[Ringlet]

//"Educate yourself"//

A condescending, demeaning phrase bandied about during lockdown by those who believed themselves to have superior knowledge and intellect.
No change here, then.

[ClareTG0ld]

// But the Astra-Zeneca vaccine was the first to be administered in the UK, while the EU were still arguing about it, and before Pfizer was rolled out. If I remember correctly, Pfizer was the preferred option of the EU, and they were still arguing about the terms of its distribution when UK started using Astra- Zeneca. //

Some of this may be true, but it was a political choice for EU members to coordinate, rather than a necessity. The UK could have taken the same path it did independent of Brexit -- perhaps pointing to, for example, its non-membership of Schengen, its status as an island and so not part of mainland Europe, etc.

It's true, in other words, that the UK was faster than the EU to roll out a vaccine -- and I'm glad that they did -- but that was not linked in itself to Brexit.

[naomi24]

//Some of this may be true//

It is true - and it's true because we didn't have to dally around waiting for the EU to tell us what we could or couldn't do. We did it.

[ToraToraTora]

CTG: "t's true, in other words, that the UK was faster than the EU to roll out a vaccine -" The case for the defence rests M'lud.

[ClareTG0ld]

That entirely ignores the point the links I provided were making.

We could have made the exact same decision, rolling out the vaccine at the exact same pace, while still in the EU. In this regard, Brexit changed nothing.

[ToraToraTora]

oh hymie, do you have access to a dictionary? Look up what the word "lie" means. It may surprise you.

[ToraToraTora]

...but the fact is we did roll out the vaccine quicker than the EUSSR. Right?

[Hymie]

See, I told you – the Brexiteers believe the lie.

[ClareTG0ld]

From my first link above (lightly reformatted):

// ... none of these [vaccine-related] successes can be chalked up to Brexit:

1. As the chief executive of the MHRA swiftly pointed out, Mr Hancock was wrong to say that the UK could approve the vaccine early because it was no longer subject to EU rules.
2. The MHRA’s decision was taken in accordance with the relevant EU legislation, which allows member states to grant temporary authorisation for a medicinal product in response to the spread of infectious diseases (among others).
3. This legislation still applies to the UK until the end of the transition period [ie 31 December 2020].
4. Any EU member state could have used the same provision of the legislation to approve the vaccine. They decided not to for political and technical reasons, not legal ones.
5. Similarly, the member states were in no way obliged to take part in the EU’s joint vaccine procurement scheme. The EU has very limited competences for public health under its founding treaties: it can take action only to “support, coordinate or supplement the actions of the Member States”.
6. The EU member states in this case voluntarily decided to opt into the joint procurement scheme. //

[ToraToraTora]

what lie? It's the truth, UK was ahead of the EUSSR, end of.

[Hymie]

Not anything to do with Brexit.

[douglas9401]

But...not ...because...of...Brexit.

[ToraToraTora]

You guys make me laugh, You'll move heaven and earth to spin the inefficiency of your beloved EUSSR. ....and you wonder why the term 5C hangs around.
Hymie, have you worked out what a porky is yet? Clue: it's not when you have an opinion on something that not everyone has.

[douglas9401]

Oh do stop braying.