Coronavirus: Boris Johnson says UK ‘wouldn’t dream’ of blocking vaccine exports to EU

Boris Johnson tonight claimed the UK ‘wouldn’t dream’ of blocking exports of Covid jabs to the EU as he sought to defuse the vaccine war brewing on the continent.

Bloc bosses are threatening to ban supplies of AstraZeneca’s jabs from coming into the UK amid a row over millions of unclaimed doses manufactured at a plant in the Netherlands.

EU chiefs are furious that the drug giant has missed its delivery targets, accusing the Anglo-Swedish firm of breaching its contract. They want doses made in Britain to be exported to Europe to plug the shortfall — but No10 has a deal with AstraZeneca for first access to UK-made jabs.

The Prime Minister, who is thought to be working behind the scenes to find a compromise with the EU, claimed Britain did not ‘believe in blockades of any kind of vaccine’.

Calling for unity at tonight’s Downing Street press conference, he added: ‘We are all fighting the same pandemic’. 

But despite Mr Johnson’s push to find a compromise, Brussels will press ahead tomorrow with plans to block vaccine exports to Britain. 

The European Commission announced it would publish new proposals tomorrow morning to widen the criteria for restricting vaccine exports from the bloc.

The powers will aim to restrict exports to countries that have higher vaccination rates, which means they are likely to be targeted directly at Britain. 

France and Germany have both come out in favour of the EU-first policy, after the sluggish vaccine rollout on the continent has seen just 10 per cent of Europeans immunised. 

It’s unclear if the ban will apply solely to AstraZeneca’s vaccine or if it will include Pfizer’s jab, which is manufactured in Belgium. 

Mr Johnson told tonight’s Downing Street press conference: ‘We’ll continue to work with European partners to deliver the vaccine rollout.

‘All I can say is we in this country don’t believe in blockades of any kind of vaccines or vaccine materials.

‘It’s not something that this country would dream of engaging in and I’m encouraged in some of the things I’ve heard from the continent in the same sense.’

Downing Street did not deny reports that AstraZeneca vaccines manufactured at the Halix facility in the Netherlands could be shared with the EU as a peace offering to prevent an export ban.

Chancellor Angela Merkel threw her support behind the move today, which  has also been advocated by European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen – her former defence minister.

A spokesman for Mrs Merkel said factories in EU countries had exported 34million doses to 30 countries, but that those in Britain and the US had shipped ‘almost nothing’ the other way. 

A senior French minister also explicitly warned exports of the jab to Britain could be halted unless more were supplied to EU nations.

In a sign of how far Europe is behind the UK, Emmanuel Macron announced today that the age from which people can be vaccinated against Covid-19 virus would be lowered to 70 from 75 from Saturday.

French Europe Minister Clement Beaune, a close ally of President Macron, directly threatened exports to the UK today, telling France Info radio: ‘AstraZeneca says ”I am experiencing delays”, we say ”mobilise your plants for us and if you don’t, we will block exports to the UK”.’

He said that such a move would be discussed at a European summit at the end of this week, adding: ‘We want to avoid that AstraZeneca doses produced in Europe go to Britain when we are not receiving anything.’ 

The hardline approach of some EU states -  which has been attacked as ‘vaccine nationalism – has created a schism in the block, as other countries including Ireland warning it would be disastrous. 

Tensions are surging as world leaders argue over millions of doses of the Oxford jab that are reportedly being stored in a factory in the Netherlands.

Neither the EU nor UK has an obvious claim to the stockpile but both want a slice of it. Boris Johnson is allegedly considering an offer to split the stash with the EU to avoid a blockade. 

Mrs Merkel this morning said: ‘I support Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. We have a problem with AstraZeneca.’

And one of her ministers also deepened the ongoing row with an attack on the Anglo-Swedish firm.

‘For us, it is very, very important that everyone lives up to their responsibilities,’ Europe minister Michael Roth said this morning.

‘Everyone has to stick to their commitments, this is clearly also true for companies that have promised the delivery of vaccine contingents.’

The row appears to be revolving around vaccine supplies being made at a factory in Leiden, Netherlands. Neither the UK nor EU is currently using the vaccine the plant is making but Britain has ruffled feathers by importing some to add to stocks being made in its own factories at a time when the EU claims AstraZeneca is under-delivering in Europe. 

Although the UK is miles ahead in its vaccination programme, officials are still worried about the disruption an EU ban would cause. A source in Whitehall told The Times ‘we’re very worried about it’.   

Merkel’s comment comes as European leaders are divided over whether to press ahead with an extraordinary ban on vaccine exports to Britain.

Brussels sources confirmed that the EU is ready to block a shipment of the AstraZeneca vaccine to the UK from a plant in the Netherlands.

But the issue has triggered a major rift among leaders of member states ahead of a key summit on Thursday.

One senior EU official described internal talks on the issue as a ‘total s*** show’.

Boris Johnson has launched a diplomatic offensive in recent days in a bid to head off a ban which could delay the UK’s vaccine programme.

The PM has sent his senior adviser Lord Lister to India for talks on unblocking a shipment of five million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine delayed last week on orders of the New Delhi government.

Government sources confirmed that the Prime Minister held private talks with Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron on Sunday in a bid to defuse the row.

But he appears to have failed as both have come out in favour of the ban if Europe can’t negotiate a better supply deal with AstraZeneca. 

Mr Johnson played down the threat yesterday, saying he was ‘reassured by talking to EU partners over the last few months that they don’t want to see blockades’.

However, some ministers are alarmed by the protectionist rhetoric emerging from the EU and fear Brussels will press ahead with the ban in a bid to distract attention from the dismal performance of its own vaccine rollout.

One insider said: ‘It is madness, but for some politicians it is easier to have a row with AstraZeneca and Britain than to have people focusing on the contracts they didn’t get.’  

Mrs von der Leyen warned last week she was ready to block vaccine exports to the UK as part of a ‘Europe first’ agenda designed to ensure that AstraZeneca and other drug firms meet their commitments to the bloc before supplying others.

A spokesman for Mrs Merkel said factories in EU countries had exported 34million doses to 30 countries, but that those in Britain and the US had shipped ‘almost nothing’. During a phone call on Sunday she told Mr Johnson that Mrs von der Leyen was right to be considering ways to further restrict shipments.

French Europe Minister Clement Beaune, a close ally of Mr Macron, said Paris also backed Mrs von der Leyen’s plans. ‘This must be the strategy of a Europe that moves faster and defends its interests: produce more, enforce contracts, and control exports,’ he said.

But a string of other EU countries are alarmed by the idea of blocking exports, amid fears it could do serious international damage to its reputation as a place to do business. Irish Taoiseach Micheal Martin warned that a ban would be ‘a very retrograde step’ which would prove counter-productive.

Mr Martin, who could face the prospect of the EU imposing a hard border with Northern Ireland to prevent vaccines entering the UK, said he had made it ‘very clear’ to fellow leaders he was opposed.

‘They’re not EU vaccines,’ he said. ‘These are vaccines paid for by other countries that are manufactured in Europe.’

The Netherlands also opposes the jab ban, with Dutch PM Mark Rutte pushing for emergency talks between Mr Johnson, Mrs von der Leyen and AstraZeneca to thrash out a compromise.

EU sources yesterday suggested the first action against the UK was likely to be a block on the export of AstraZeneca vaccines from the Halix plant in the Netherlands.

The Dutch plan would see No 10 agree to free up some production capacity at the plant, which currently supplies only Britain, to make jabs for Europe as well.

A senior Dutch government source said Mr Rutte wants to avoid a ‘lose-lose scenario’ where Brussels forces his country to block exports: ‘We must avoid a tipping point whereby exporting to third countries becomes problematic.’

Belgium also opposes the ban, fearing it could hamper supply chains worldwide. The Pfizer jab is produced there.

UK sources played down the idea of a compromise that would allow the sharing of vaccines produced at the Halix plant. A source said there had been ‘no indication of that’. Health sources insisted that the bulk of the Britain’s AstraZeneca supplies are manufactured in the UK.

The PM’s spokesman said: ‘We have said throughout the vaccination programme that supplies will fluctuate, but we remain confident in our supplies.’

However, one independent analysis suggested a total EU export ban could push the UK’s vaccination programme back by two months, potentially delaying Mr Johnson’s road map for lifting the Covid lockdown.

Whitehall sources played down this estimate but confirmed ministers had been warned a ban by the EU could hit supplies during May and June.

Vaccine supplies are already due to dip next month because of the delay to the shipment from India.

Downing Street said the vaccine rollout had to remain an ‘international effort’.

The PM’s spokesman told reporters Britain expects the EU to continue to stand by its commitment, adding: ‘It’s important that the whole world works together.’

US health chiefs accuse AstraZeneca of providing ‘outdated’ information from its vaccine trial – when it claimed the shot was 79% effective – in a bid to get approval in America

US health chiefs have accused AstraZeneca of sending ‘outdated information’ as part of an application to get its Covid vaccine approved for use on Americans.

The drug giant, which is manufacturing Oxford University’s jab, revealed yesterday that a US-specific trial found the vaccine prevented 100 percent of hospital admissions and deaths from Covid, along with 79 percent of all symptomatic infections. It said it hoped to get a licence from drug regulators within weeks.

Experts on the Data and Safety Monitoring Board, a secretive committee inside the National Institutes for Health that is vetting Covid vaccines, raised the alarm yesterday when AstraZeneca announced interim results.

The issue only came to light when the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) put out an ‘unprecedented’ public statement accusing the drug-maker of not giving watchdogs the full details from a study of the jab, urging the firm to share more information ‘as soon as possible’.

Dr Fauci called the NIAID note ‘quite harsh’ and assured Americans that AstraZeneca’s ‘data really are quite good’ in a Tuesday Good Morning America interview. 

But, he added: ‘It really is unfortunate that this happened. This is really what you call an unforced error because the fact is this is really very likely a very good vaccine, and this kind of thing does…nothing but really cast some doubt about the vaccines and maybe contribute to the hesitancy [of Americans to get the shot].’ 

The hiccup is latest in a string of PR disasters for AstraZeneca, which has faced constant criticism over its jab with European officials first claiming it didn’t work on older people and later that it caused blood clots – neither of which turned out to be true. UK and EU officials are now rowing over supplies.  

Real-world data proves that the vaccine is protecting people against Covid in the UK, which has given the jab to over 13 million people since it was approved in January. It means any updated figures are unlikely to change the regulator’s decision but must be examined thoroughly. 

Experts reacting to the NIAID’s statement released last night described it as ‘unusual’ and said airing grievances in the public domain was ‘unprecedented’. They criticized AstraZeneca for ‘confusing’ officials with the way it was sending its data. 

So far, there is no indication that the scuffle over AstraZeneca’s press release will change its plans to ask the FDA for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to authorize its vaccine in the coming weeks, or the shots odds of getting the expected green light from regulators next month. 

However, the FDA had already said AstraZeneca would likely face more scrutiny during its review meeting and process. 

And the allegedly ‘outdated’ data in Monday’s press release will undoubtedly be added to regulators’ list of questions. 

The full statement read: ‘Late Monday, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) notified NIAID, BARDA, and AstraZeneca that it was concerned by information released by AstraZeneca on initial data from its Covid vaccine clinical trial. 

‘The DSMB expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data. 

‘We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible.’

Covid vaccines can’t be rolled out in the US until they are approved by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), who rely on independent committees such as the DSMB to rigorously review the evidence. 

The DSMB – which is run through the NIAID – is made up of around 10 to 15 leading scientists and statisticians who have no ties to the Government or the drug firms making the jabs. 

‘It is not unknown for a [regulator] to disagree with investigators over interpretation of trial results but it is usually done in private, so this is unprecedented in my opinion,’ said Professor Stephen Evans, a vaccines expert at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. 

‘I have said frequently that ‘headline’ estimates of efficacy being compared between trials is very unreliable.

‘The DSMB [Data and Safety Monitoring Board] has responsibility essentially for safety of participants, not efficacy unless it is either so high or so low or negative that it is unethical to continue to randomize, so in some senses they might be seen to be exceeding their brief… 

‘One explanation might well be that this trial is currently being conducted when there is a large amount of a new variant about more recently, and, as might be expected, the efficacy against that variant might be less, so more recent data shows reduced efficacy. Of course the other vaccines may also show such reduced efficacy and we don’t know by how much.

‘It does not leave me concerned particularly unless they had found a safety issue that was being hidden, which does not appear to be the case.’ 

Dr Peter English, former editor of Vaccines in Practice Magazine and a former British Medical Association official, said the statement was ‘problematic in various ways’. 

He said: ‘In my opinion this is shamefully bad communication by NIH as with their lack of clarity they have left room for speculation which could be damaging for vaccine uptake.’

And Dr Stephen Griffin, an associate professor of medicine at the University of Leeds, said the issue ‘highlights the importance of data being provided at the same time as summaries being made public’. 

He added: ‘Naturally, the news yesterday was taken in good faith and the issues raised by the DSMB may be a mere technicality, yet this won’t be clear until we have full disclosure. 

‘Nevertheless, we must ensure that issues such as this are dealt with appropriately and that idle speculation is not seized upon by groups seeking to undermine faith in vaccination programmes.’

Oxford University yesterday published interim results of a trial done in the US, Chile and Peru that found its jab prevented 100 percent of severe Covid cases and 79 percent of all symptomatic infections.

It had been carried out because US regulators the FDA wanted a trial done on Americans before it would approve the jab, choosing not to use data from Oxford’s tests in the UK, South Africa and Brazil.  

And the study found the vaccine works just as well in over-65s as it does in younger people – it was the largest one so far conducted on older people, including more than 6,000 of them.

The trial — which involved 32,000 people in total — also confirmed the vaccine doesn’t increase the risk of blood clots, which is a confidence boost after safety concerns in Europe rattled public faith in the jab last week. 

Two doses were given four weeks apart in the study and the effectiveness of a single dose was not reported. Full results from the trial are expected to be published later in the year. 

Trump’s administration made a deal with AstraZeneca last year for 300 million doses and the federal government is currently sitting on nearly 30million which can’t be used until the shot is authorized by the FDA. 

But this process has been delayed now, too, with officials having to wait until AstraZeneca sends the specific data they want. It is unclear how much of a delay the issue will cause, but the authorisation had been expected in April.

Experts said the news about the hold-up was concerning.

Professor Francois Balloux, a biologist at University College London, said: ‘This is a highly unusual statement by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). 

‘It comes close to accusing Oxford/AZ of having willfully misrepresented some results from their recent US vaccine trial.’

And Professor Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Georgetown University, said: ‘If nothing else Oxford/AstraZeneca continues their perfect record of sharing trial data in the most confusing way possible.’ 

AstraZeneca said it still expected to get approval for the vaccine and one of its vice-presidents, Ruud Dobber, said on CNBC yesterday: ‘Assuming that the approval will take place in a fast way, we hope to deliver 30million doses instantly after the EUA [Emergency Use Approval] for Americans to get vaccinated.’  

Oxford’s Professor Andrew Pollard, who runs the vaccine trials, said the results were ‘remarkable’, and its inventor Professor Sarah Gilbert said she was ‘very pleased’.

Dean of Brown University’s School of Public Health, Dr Ashish Jha, called the results ‘fabulous news’ in a tweet and told the Today Show that the AstraZeneca shot is the ‘best ticket towards vaccinating the world.’  

The jab-makers were in need of good press after the past fortnight saw more than a dozen European countries shun the jab amid fears it could cause blood clots on the brain – on which most have now backed down, although Sweden, Denmark and Norway are still hesitating and refusing to use it. 

Meanwhile, Boris Johnson is preparing to call for EU leaders to shun ‘vaccine nationalism’ amid fears they will ban exports of vaccines because AstraZeneca is delivery on expectations in Britain but not in Europe, where it has allegedly only provided a third of the number of doses that were expected by the end of March.

Britain will also have to cope with five million fewer doses of the jab than expected in April because an expected shipment from India has been cancelled. 

This is expected to mean the vaccine drive, which gave out a record 844,285 jabs on Sunday, will have to stick mainly to second doses instead of new patients.

Some 32,449 people across all age groups took part in the phase three trial in the US, Chile and Peru, with a total of 141 cases of symptomatic Covid reported. 

Around two thirds of all the participants had the real vaccine – 21,583 – and the rest had a fake jab so the effects could be compared. Full results of the trial have not yet been published.

The initial results showed that among people aged 65 and over, there was 80 percent protection against developing symptomatic Covid, Oxford said.

This comes after officials in Europe, who had smeared the vaccine on yet another occasion, claimed that the vaccine didn’t work on people over 55 and tried to prevent it being used on elderly people.

Overall the study, which officials said was incomplete, found that the effectiveness of the jab against symptomatic Covid was even higher than it had been in the original trials that took place in the UK, South Africa and Brazil.

‘These results are great news as they show the remarkable efficacy of the vaccine in a new population and are consistent with the results from Oxford-led trials,’ said Professor Pollard.

‘We can expect strong impact against COVID-19 across all ages and for people of all different backgrounds from widespread use of the vaccine.’ 

AstraZeneca has not yet published the full results of the trial, but its press release does not address whether or not the US trial screened participants for variants. 

The older ‘wild-type’ coronavirus is still dominant in the US, but the UK’s B117 variant is gaining ground, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lists four additional variants as ‘concerning.’ 

In prior trials, the AstraZeneca shot was equally effective against B117, and worked well in Brazil where the P1 variant is dominant. 

But it performed poorly in South Africa, where the B1351 variant is dominant. 

Nonetheless, US health authorities are eager to add a fourth vaccine to the American arsenal. 

AstraZeneca’s shot has already been authorized in more than 50 countries around the world, and has helped the UK’s vaccination campaign to race ahead of the America’s.  

AstraZeneca’s US trial got a late start compared to its other global tests, beginning on August 28. 

Trials were also protracted after the death of a participant in Brazil last year.

American regulators dragged out the trial pause even after other countries resumed their tests. AstraZeneca’s trial wasn’t allowed to resume for more than six weeks.  

After European leaders this month claimed people were developing brain blood clots and even dying after having the AstraZeneca vaccine, inspectors looked at the risk of blood clots and found it was not increased at all.

They looked at a specific condition that had scared officials in Germany, called cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, and found there wasn’t a single case recorded in the clinical trial. 

The European Medicines Agency itself – which first launched an investigation and triggered panic across the continent – last week admitted there was no proof of a link to blood clots and backed down on its warning.

Health officials around the world, including Britain’s regulator the MHRA and the World Health Organization, have urged countries to keep using the vaccine to stamp out coronavirus.

Professor Sarah Gilbert, the Oxford scientist who invented the jab, said on BBC Radio 4 today: ‘I’m very pleased to see these results.

‘Another large trial in different countries to what we had before again reporting on the safety and high efficacy of this vaccine, so it’s really good news to see that.’

She added: ’20 percent of people in this trial were over the age of 65 and there was no drop in protection for those people. It was just as good in the over-65s as it was in the younger people and that’s very clear from this trial.’  

On Europe’s concerns, Professor Gilbert said: ‘I’d say the balance remains hugely in favour of using this vaccine. Across Europe there are thousands of deaths a day occurring from COVID.

‘It’s really important that we get the chance to protect people as quickly as possible, this vaccine is available for use in Europe and it will save lives.’ 

AstraZeneca said leaving an interval longer than four weeks – as is happening in the UK – can increase efficacy and ‘accelerates the number of people who can receive their first dose’.

This is understood to be because it allows the body to cement the immunity from the first dose before the second – the booster dose – provokes a second, separate reaction and lets the already established protection strengthen itself. 

As part of an agreement with Oxford, AstraZeneca is supplying the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis for the duration of the pandemic and in perpetuity for low and middle-income countries.

The news comes as polling for YouGov suggests confidence in the safety of the vaccine has dropped in the last two weeks in Spain, Germany, France and Italy.

Some 55 percent of Germans said the AstraZeneca vaccine is unsafe while 32 percent said it is safe.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine was already seen as unsafe in France but concerns have increased even further, with 61 percent now saying it is unsafe while 23 percent say it is safe, according to the survey of almost 9,000 people in seven countries.

More than a dozen European countries suspended use of the vaccine over concerns about blood clots, although most have now resumed its use.

The European Medicines Agency and the World Health Organization (WHO) have ruled that the AstraZeneca jab is safe and effective.