News Reader.info

The European Union is threatening to clamp down on exports of Covid vaccines, including across the Channel. The background to this move is the slow progress of the immunisation programme on

the Continent, which is being blamed on supply problems. EU countries lag far behind Britain, having only vaccinated an average of 2 per cent of their populations, compared to the UK’s 10

per cent. The workhorse of the European programme is the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which is manufactured in Belgium. The British Government has secured 40 million doses of the drug, which was

the first to be licensed here, but the European Commission has demanded that the company inform its officials before any future exports. There are concerns that the EU may require Pfizer, a

US-based pharmaceutical, to give priority to member states regardless of contractual obligations. Such export controls could interrupt supplies to the UK and other countries, such as

Israel, which depend on the Pfizer vaccine. A further twist to the story is a dispute between the EU Commission and AstraZeneca, the Anglo-Swedish pharmaceutical which makes the Oxford

vaccine. Last week the company warned Brussels that it would reduce the supply of 100 million doses to the EU because its Belgian plant has production problems. The EU Commissioner for

health, Stella Kyriakides, says that this reduction of 60 per cent was “not acceptable”. Ominously, she appeared to link these two separate issues under the rubric of “transparency”. The

British vaccination programme is increasingly dependent on the Oxford vaccine, though supplies are not endangered because it is manufactured here by AstraZeneca. What is emerging, however,

is a potential cross-Channel trade dispute over vaccines. The political fallout from public dismay at the slow pace of immunisation is feeding the protectionist and dirigiste pressures that

are seldom far below the surface in Continental Europe. No sooner is Brexit behind us than we face the prospect of a “jab war” between the EU and the UK. Such a conflict is unnecessary as

well as ugly. Any problems that the pharmaceutical industry may experience in producing brand new vaccines rapidly and on a vast scale are purely commercial. It would be disgraceful for

politicians, let alone unelected bureaucrats, to politicise the vaccination process by blaming delays on supply. The last thing that ordinary Europeans, or anyone else, need now is the

politicisation of the pandemic. A jab war between Brussels and London won’t save a single life. Indeed, it could cost thousands. Historically, it is not only trade wars that have been fought

over vital supplies. Gold and silver, food and drink, sugar and spice, iron and steel, oil and gas, uranium and plutonium have all fuelled real wars at one time or another. Now Covid

vaccines have become the most valuable commodity on the planet. One lesson that has emerged from the pandemic is that in the field of biotechnology, Britain must treat its human capital as a

strategic asset. The intricate nexus between our world-class universities and the pharmaceutical industry has proved to be invaluable. Just seven years ago, however, Pfizer made a hostile

bid for AstraZeneca. There was a risk that a precious pool of talent might have been lost to the UK. The takeover was only averted after leading scientists at Cambridge raised the alarm and

alerted politicians. Among the voices urging caution on both shareholders and the authorities was the then Mayor of London, Boris Johnson. In the end, Pfizer withdrew their offer and

AstraZeneca went on to contribute to a major bio-medical campus at Cambridge, England — not Cambridge, Massachusetts. International cooperation in science is crucial, but when it comes to

the huge investment required to develop original research — new vaccines, for example — for the market, it is inevitable that countries will wish to safeguard their strategic interests. The

British have invested taxpayers’ money in the Oxford vaccine; the Germans have done the same with BioNTech. It is inconceivable that the Government would now allow a takeover of our

biotechnology industry by, say, the Chinese, any more than defence contractors such as Rolls-Royce. With good diplomacy, it is still possible to avert a jab war with Europe. The fact that

imports from as near a neighbour as Belgium could, however, be interrupted on the whim of the EU Commission should reinforce the case for reinforcing our own production capacity in

biotechnology. The UK is undoubtedly a scientific superpower; indeed, brains have always been our most precious asset. Whatever else it means, “global Britain” should not mean any diminution

of commitment, public and private, to research and development. Above all, homegrown talent must be nurtured, despite the exigencies of lockdown. Today’s grim unemployment figures, the

highest in four years, signal a waste of potential. The disruption of schools and universities mean that the prospects of posterity may be squandered. The Prime Minister clearly grasps the

importance of human capital. He needs to enlist the best minds in business, technology and science to ensure that we emerge from the Covid crisis with our intellectual resources not only

secure but enhanced. Give our geniuses the tools and they will finish the job.