spanishman
Well-known member
My perception of the EU view is that they are attempting to reduce the loss of lives in their countries.I don't disagree with the retribution point as there's bound to be some **** waving and ******* contests along the way but this goes way beyond that on the EU side.
It's absolutely OK to say that the EU have acted poorly here without compromising your stance. I can disaggregate poor decisions from the EU and bad judgement from our horrific Tory government as not being mutually exclusive.
I think it's important not to let the recent history cloud the difference between right and wrong. Especially not when people are dying every day.
The behaviour of the EU threatens lives as much as the awful management of our country and neither are acceptable, least of all on political grounds.
Sadly, this argument is about which countries are likely to lose more lives due to non-delivery of products.
I feel that it is due to a company that overestimated it's ability to deliver. It looks like it over promised to two different customers.
I am sure that such disputes happen all the time. However in this case the stakes are much higher.
It is made worse by the temporary shortfall in delivery of Pfizer vaccines.
The sad thing is that this situation is likely to lead to increased loss of lives somewhere in the world.
I am pleased that the EU has backed down on NI. A relatively easy thing to do as no vaccines cross the land border at present. However I see that they reserve the right to stop this route being a "back door" in the future. In the context of the new export control checks this seems reasonable.
Last edited: