The Health Secretary boasted that the Europeans were ‘moving a little bit more slowly’ due to extra red tape – but stressed that the Pfizer BioNTech jab had still gone through intense safety checks.
However, the UK’s Medicines and healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) quickly played down the idea, saying the approval was made using provisions under European law, which still binds the UK until the transition period ends in January.
German MEP Pieter Liese weighed in to insist individual EU member states could have authorised the vaccine but had chosen to wait for the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to examine more information rather than follow the ‘hasty’ example of Britain.
Meanwhile, Berlin’s ambassador to the UK issued a sharp retort after Business Secretary Alok Sharma said history would remember the ‘UK led humanity’s charge against this disease’.
Matt Hancock (pictured in Downing Street today) boasted that the Europeans were ‘moving a little bit more slowly’ due to extra red tape – but stressed that the Pfizer BioNTech jab had gone through intense safety checks.
Berlin’s ambassador to the UK issued a sharp retort after Business Secretary Alok Sharma said history would remember the ‘UK led humanity’s charge against this disease’
The UK’s Medicines and healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said saying the approval of the Pfizer vaccine (pictured) was made using provisions under European law
Andreas Michaelis pointed out that BioNTech was a German firm, adding: ‘Why is it so difficult to recognise this important step forward as a great international effort and success?’
Mr Hancock kicked off the row in a round of interviews this morning, telling Times Radio: ‘The reason we’ve been able to move this fast, and the UK is the first country in the world to have a clinically authorised vaccine, the reason is twofold.
‘Firstly, because the MRHA has done a great job of working with the company to look at that data as it’s come through and do things in parallel, rather than one after the other as they normally would, that’s the first reason.
‘The second reason is because, whilst until earlier this year we were in the European Medicines Agency (EMA), because of Brexit we’ve been able to make a decision to do this based on the UK regulator, a world-class regulator, and not go at the pace of the Europeans, who are moving a little bit more slowly.
‘We do all the same safety checks and the same processes, but we have been able to speed up how they’re done because of Brexit.’
Mr Liese, who sits on the European Parliament’s public health committee and is a member of Angela Merkel’s CDU party, said: ‘I consider this decision to be problematic and recommend that EU member states do not repeat the process in the same way.
‘A few weeks of thorough examination by the EMA is better than a hasty emergency marketing authorisation of a vaccine.’
He suggested that the move could have been influenced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s domestic difficulties.
‘Britain now has nearly 60,000 corona deaths. Add to this the fact that Britain is an island and has never been a Schengen member, which means open borders in Europe,’ he said.
‘Britain would have to compare itself more with countries like New Zealand or Ireland, which have a much better grip on the infection rate.’
The EMA suggested that it was imposing more stringent checks than the emergency process used by the MHRA.
At a press briefing, MHRA chief Dr June Raine (pictured) said: ‘We have been able to authorise the supply of this vaccine using provisions under European law which exist until January 1.’
A spokeswoman said ‘The temporary authorisation of the vaccine by the MHRA is not a marketing authorisation.
‘It differs from marketing authorisations in the level of evidence submitted and checks required.’
The EMA believes that the conditional marketing authorisation (CMA) process is ‘the most appropriate regulatory mechanism for use in the current pandemic emergency’.
A CMA application is supported by ‘extensive data’ submitted by companies and ‘provides a controlled and robust framework’.
BioNTech is a German firm and ministers’ attempts to portray the approval as a UK success story were criticised by the Berlin government.
Germany’s ambassador to the UK, Andreas Michaelis, attacked Business Secretary Alok Sharma’s claim that ‘in years to come, we will remember this moment as the day the UK led humanity’s charge against this disease’.
The diplomat said: ‘Why is it so difficult to recognise this important step forward as a great international effort and success?
‘I really don’t think this is a national story.
‘In spite of the German company, BioNTech, having made a crucial contribution, this is European and transatlantic.’
At a press briefing, MHRA chief Dr June Raine said: ‘We have been able to authorise the supply of this vaccine using provisions under European law which exist until January 1.
‘Our speed or our progress has been totally dependent on the availability of data in our rolling review and the independent advice we have received.’
Downing Street stopped short of backing Mr Hancock’s claim about Brexit.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: ‘It is clear that we are the first country in the world to approve this vaccine and it is incredibly positive news that we will be able to start to distribute it.’
Source: Daily Mail |World News