Don’t you think that having independence from the EMA meant we could approve Pfizer/Astra vaccine earlier? That is my memory. It’s was only a short advantage but it did exist.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
We were still in the EMA at that time, what was actually helpful was the NHS and the health structures in the UK that allowed the rollout to take place quickly.
But we would have been in the EU procurement scheme, right? We cut a deal with Pfizer on our own and basically started to take supply from Europe before they could get going.
Of course. I just think that the way we did it was optimal for us and it wouldn’t have happened that way if not for Brexit. So I feel like there is some truth to the fact that it helped with vaccines but we don’t have a counter factual so we can’t say by how much.
That's not true. NI is still bound by the EMA and bound by EU regs and was almost as quick as the rest of the UK in rolling out the vaccine. It was a couple of percentage points behind. But, on the BBC in 2021, it was said it was because data wasn't input fast enough, not because of EU ties
We approved and administered the first vaccine when we were in the transition period so we were still under the auspices of the EMA. EU pharmaceutical law continued to apply to the UK at that time.
True. But none did because there was a common purchasing agreement so there would have been no point. Plus if we were in we would have been in that joint purchasing agreement.
Comments
MHRA actually was still following EU regulations when it approved the first vaccine, as explained here https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/covid-vaccine-decisions-brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/21/hungary-breaks-ranks-with-eu-to-license-russian-vaccine-sputnik-v?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other