I see that all the newspapers are talking about the errors of the EU on vaccines, that there have been (but I don't remember governments shouting "it's a mistake!") And instead of remembering that the member states ARE part of these errors (" it is the fault of the family "certainly indicates the negligence of its members) because it would be trivial, I would like to bring things back to reality and see what were the REAL mistakes of the EU in this management.
First I reveal my bias: reading any history book you notice that the thalassocracies always try the continental block against the European continent. Especially the British. And if we look at what happened with the vaccines, we clearly see the footprint. They have acted in order to achieve (with other methods) a real continental blockade on the supply of vaccines. Since this has killed tens or hundreds of thousands of people, the US and UK should be considered as "declared enemies", and not as allies, much less as friends.
Having said that, since the Italian press seems unable to use google and social media like any blogger, I would like to point out the vaccine situation in the studio . As you can see, the vaccines in the study are 246, or 235, depending on WHO is used to count them.
Now I would like to respond to those (especially, but not limited to, three pompous & overrated who gather on Youtube to blow each other off and tell each other how good they are) who are reprimanding the EU regarding its mistakes. And if those three (sometimes four) pompous & overrated are "the best", imagine the others as well.
First point: the upward race on prices.
To hear the geniuses, the EU would have sought it because by paying little for the vaccine it would have lent itself to a bullish race, which it has lost. So their recipe (I don't want to know if they bought shares in vaccine companies, mind you) would have been that the EU had to enter a bullfighting race over the price of vaccines. Because anyone who understands finance as much as my cat knows very well that in a situation of scarcity, using the price as a tool produces a price rally. The first question is: with the limited budget of the EU, and with opponents like the US, was it really realistic to win a bullfight ? Did you really want to play bagsful of money against Washington? I repeat: if the geniuses who say this are "the best", I let you imagine the others.
Second point: orders and deliveries.
The EU has NEVER ordered vaccines, does not stock them and does not manage orders. The EU has reserved quantities, fixed the price, defined the processes to allow individual states to purchase vaccines. This is because the EU DOES NOT HAVE executive bodies of health type, nor infrastructure, capable of doing anything else. Until now, the EU HAS NEVER had competences in health matters, except EMA. Consequently, it limited itself to issuing pre-orders, defining processes so that states could use them to place orders at an advantageous price. Attempts to buy more vaccines, however never started and only discussed, were immediately stigmatized (by Salvini & Co) when Germany seemed to do so. But, beware, the real contracts are stipulated by the individual countries according to fixed processes. The logistics are the responsibility of the countries. Companies have so far announced reductions and cuts in deliveries, but be honest and admit that depots are NOT empty. About 30% of the doses are still unused. Even if individual countries were FLOODED with vaccines, they would simply fill warehouses and cold rooms. Years and years of depletion of health systems by marketers (and here I would like to see what the free-market scoundrels who continually gather on Youtube to suck each other have to say) have achieved this. By the way, who is it that has always opposed the idea that the EU has executive powers and health infrastructure? Um … the nation states.
Third point: now the EU has to do something.
Unfortunately, the same states that want the EU to "do something" have always fought against the idea of giving the EU judicial powers, as well as health skills. European courts, such as the Court of Justice, require counterparties to join. What does it mean? That AstraZeneca being English is not subject to it, and Pfizer neither. Now the same nations that say "the EU must punish those who do not provide vaccines" are those who seem not to know that the EU does not have, to date, a court with territorial validity that can take a company and try it in civil courts. . The states have to do it. To date, the EU does not even have a structure that can deliver a summons for damages, and does not have its own code of civil procedure. This does not happen by chance: the member states have always opposed this idea, because a European justice could have made a fool of local politicians and lobbies. How the EU is asked to "do something" after years of opposing any attempt to give the EU judicial powers is the measure of how pompous and overrated are all politicians (and youtubbari politicians) who ask "to do something ".
but EMA is too slow yaahhh.
This hack would make sense were it not that national institutions were even slower. And it would make sense were it not that EMA has just moved from London to Amsterdam, and has had to renew a lot of officials and rebuild procedures, because the British did the brexit and left. But even if it weren't, the national agencies don't shine, huh . Did you seriously prefer these ? And we can admire them at work even under supervision: in Germany the AstraZeneca vaccine has a limit of 65 years, which in Italy is contested, and in France it has other limits, and so on. As for speed, I remind you that AIFA took MORE than 20 years to regulate RU486, which had been in use in France for twenty years when it arrived in Italy. This obviously for political reasons, so I imagine what it is like to have a no-all antivax party like M5S in government, and AIFA doing the authorizations. And again, without doing ALL the testing, you're just doing population experiments.
but the European states must become autonomous in production.
These are companies, right? All you have to do is hunt the lira and do it. Unless you intend to involve the military pharmaceutical institute which is theoretically the body to ask for vaccines. So far he's found masks, and he's not even been that bright. But the problem is that the EU has NEVER prohibited any state from becoming autonomous. By the way, at what point is the experimentation of Italian vaccines made in Italy? And the infrastructure to produce them? To tell the truth we don't know because there are so many but no data can be found. I can give you a summary of Germany because the data is public: here . The EU has never banned countries from being autonomous, quite the contrary. It seems that the member countries are not shining, but having no data on Italy, maybe I'm wrong. The wizards of Youtube (who post on the courier) will correct me.
And these are the complaints that come from the most clever. Just imagine what others are saying.
Having said that: all right then? No not at all. There have been several errors.
the mediocre are not helped. Never.
Anyone who has spent years making top class in high school knows what I mean. The mediocre never give thanks. If it's okay they say it was your duty to do it, if you fail in the task you pass it's your fault. The EU should have said “ we do not have, and have never had, executive-type health skills. So, just order the vaccines from you. Whoever pays more will have more and sooner, according to the laws of the sacred market ”. (Guess which countries could pay higher amounts?). If they wanted to think about the future, they should have said “ we have no executive power in health matters. Now come here and sign a treaty with which we establish European health, and THEN expel the lira to finance it. At that point, we move on ”. Moreover, even the pharmaceutical authority, due to brexit, has just moved to the Netherlands and is not yet fully operational. So, in practice, the EU offered itself to a pile of mediocre idiots (I want to remind you that Italy has entered a pandemic with the largest ruling party that is against vaccines , whose "high" leader has defined Rita Levi Montalcini "an old whore"), to act as a scapegoat. A tactical error, probably dictated by good faith, which could have been avoided. The mediocre are not helped. Never.
the mediocre are not protected. Never.
Likewise, anyone at school who has ever tried to defend someone from bullying without being asked has learned their lesson: the defended one will go over to the side of the bullies and beat you too. You will have learned, clearly, to let the weak fill with spit and blows, as they deserve. Similarly, the EU today does not have a civil code of its own, a code of procedure, and the European courts count on the fact that the accused volunteers to be tried. This is because, as I said, states have NEVER wanted true European civil justice. Under these conditions, the last thing to do was to enter into contracts with private individuals. If you don't have real private law and a competent court, you have to let it go and let the countries get by. Or you say “ hey, I really want to do private contracts with pharmaceutical companies, but I don't have a civil right and I don't have the courts. Now come to Brussels and sign a beautiful treaty where you give me the judiciary power, and instruct the European Parliament to draw up a private law, a civil code and a code of civil procedure. And hunt the money for the European courts ”. But in the conditions in which it finds itself, that is the complete deprivation of judicial powers, the EU did not even have to try to negotiate a contract with private individuals. It can make treaties with nations (it has the powers to do so) but not contracts between private individuals. He had to let the states get by.
persevere in defending a pile of mediocre carrion.
It is clear that all disastrous politicians (I repeat: the national vaccine warehouses are not empty, so the fact that there is an Anglo-American continental blockade is serious but not an excuse beyond a certain limit) will try to blame their disastrous organizations to the EU. To free themselves from these situations, those who had offered (without being obliged) to close a patch have only one way to get out. When it happens to me about projects, the first thing I tell the spitters is “ fine. In fact it wasn't my job but I took this on my shoulders because nobody wanted to do it, or at least was doing it. Since the situation has now changed, I leave the baton to you professionals. Your time to shine! ”) It is always a winning move, because if the wizards fail you can hit them galore, if they succeed you put a patch when needed and then delegate it at the right time. What the EU should do is to say “ free everyone: since I have no executive powers of a medical or judicial nature and I have only tried to fix it, now the countries can do their own thing. Price bidding, suing defaulting companies with their courts, and all the wonderful things you want to do. Go Mario, you are all of us! “The error of the EU, that is, is to persevere in good faith. It is doable even if agreements have been signed, saying "we will not enforce them".
This last part is still feasible, so I consider it serious that it is not the Commission's response. After all, I repeat, the EU has no particular competences in medical matters (except EMA, which is not an executive body, that is, it does not do things, the EU does not even manage a hospital or a warehouse), and it has no real power to judicial type with its own civil code. He could get out of the plague by saying “ the heads of state come here to Brussels, dissolve previous agreements, and break free from the rules they signed. We will talk about it again when the EU has an independent health system with organizational powers "
This excess of, if you will, naivety or good faith, mixed with good will, was the mistake of the EU. Of course, the little men with too much power who sit at the top of European countries have done what mediocre people always do: blame others and start with some shows.
And we still haven't had the opportunity to explore the SECOND very serious mistake made, namely the establishment of the Recovery Fund.
Error that will soon present the bill.