欧盟委员会主席：在新冠疫苗接种速度上，英国是“快艇”而欧盟是“大油轮”
正文翻译
(Ursula von der Leyen said the EC should have warned the public of the likely ‘ups and downs’ of the vaccine rollout.)
（乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩说，欧盟委员会应该警告公众疫苗推广过程中可能出现的“跌宕起伏”。）
新闻：
Ursula von der Leyen: UK is Covid vaccine 'speedboat' compared with EU 'tanker'
-European commission’s president admits it underestimated difficulties in vaccine rollout
欧盟委员会主席乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩：在新冠疫苗接种速度上，英国是“快艇”而欧盟是“大油轮”
——欧盟委员会主席承认低估了疫苗推广的困难
-European commission’s president admits it underestimated difficulties in vaccine rollout
欧盟委员会主席乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩：在新冠疫苗接种速度上，英国是“快艇”而欧盟是“大油轮”
——欧盟委员会主席承认低估了疫苗推广的困难
(Ursula von der Leyen said the EC should have warned the public of the likely ‘ups and downs’ of the vaccine rollout.)
（乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩说，欧盟委员会应该警告公众疫苗推广过程中可能出现的“跌宕起伏”。）
新闻：
Ursula von der Leyen has said a country on its own such as the UK can act more like a “speedboat” than the EU “tanker” but that the 27 governments are right to work together on their vaccination programme.
乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩表示，英国这样的国家可以像“快艇”一样行动，而不是像欧盟的“大油轮”，但这27个国家的政府在他们的疫苗接种项目上合作是正确的。
乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩表示，英国这样的国家可以像“快艇”一样行动，而不是像欧盟的“大油轮”，但这27个国家的政府在他们的疫苗接种项目上合作是正确的。
The European commission president admitted to mistakes along the way in the rollout of vaccines, including failing to invest sufficiently in upscaling production capacity.
这位欧盟委员会主席承认，在推广疫苗的过程中，她犯了一些错误，包括未能在提高生产能力方面进行充分投资。
这位欧盟委员会主席承认，在推广疫苗的过程中，她犯了一些错误，包括未能在提高生产能力方面进行充分投资。
She also conceded that the commission “underestimated the difficulties” it would face and should have warned the public in advance of the likely “ups and downs”.
她还承认，欧盟委员会“低估了”它将面临的“困难”，并应在可能的“跌宕起伏”之前警告公众。
她还承认，欧盟委员会“低估了”它将面临的“困难”，并应在可能的“跌宕起伏”之前警告公众。
But, in an interview with nine European newspapers, she defended Brussels against recent criticism that it had gone too slowly in agreeing contracts in light of a deal being agreed between the UK and AstraZeneca three months before the bloc.
但在接受9家欧洲报纸采访时，她为布鲁塞尔方面进行了辩护，反驳了最近的批评，即鉴于英国与阿斯利康之间的一项交易比欧盟早3个月就已达成，布鲁塞尔方面在达成合同方面进展太慢。
但在接受9家欧洲报纸采访时，她为布鲁塞尔方面进行了辩护，反驳了最近的批评，即鉴于英国与阿斯利康之间的一项交易比欧盟早3个月就已达成，布鲁塞尔方面在达成合同方面进展太慢。
Von der Leyen, a former German defence minister, said that while collective decision-making could be cumbersome, it ensured poorer EU countries were not left behind, according to the French newspaper La Croix.
据法国报纸《La Croix》报道，冯·德莱恩表示，尽管集体决策可能会很麻烦，但它确保了较贫穷的欧盟国家不会被落在后面。
据法国报纸《La Croix》报道，冯·德莱恩表示，尽管集体决策可能会很麻烦，但它确保了较贫穷的欧盟国家不会被落在后面。
“I am aware that alone a country can be a speedboat, while the EU is more like a tanker,” Von der Leyen said. “Before concluding a contract with a pharmaceutical company, the 27 member states had five full days to say whether they agreed or not.
“我意识到，独自一个国家可以（在疫苗推广方面）变成一艘快艇，而欧盟更像是一艘大油轮，” 冯·德莱恩说。“在与一家制药公司签订合同之前，欧盟27个成员国有整整5天的时间来决定是否同意。”
“我意识到，独自一个国家可以（在疫苗推广方面）变成一艘快艇，而欧盟更像是一艘大油轮，” 冯·德莱恩说。“在与一家制药公司签订合同之前，欧盟27个成员国有整整5天的时间来决定是否同意。”
“This naturally delays the process. Indeed, we must constantly put pressure on ourselves so that each step of the decision-making process is as fast and efficient as possible.
“这自然就会推迟这个过程。事实上，我们必须不断地给自己施加压力，以便决策过程的每一个步骤都尽可能迅速和有效。
“这自然就会推迟这个过程。事实上，我们必须不断地给自己施加压力，以便决策过程的每一个步骤都尽可能迅速和有效。
“But I am absolutely convinced that the European approach is the right one. On these vaccines, we worked faster than usual. I can’t even imagine what it would have meant for Europe, in terms of unity, if one or more member states had access to vaccines and not the others.”
“但我绝对相信，欧洲的做法是正确的。在这些疫苗上，我们比平时工作得快。我甚至无法想象，如果一个或多个成员国能够获得疫苗，而其他国家得不到，这对欧洲的团结意味着什么。”
“但我绝对相信，欧洲的做法是正确的。在这些疫苗上，我们比平时工作得快。我甚至无法想象，如果一个或多个成员国能够获得疫苗，而其他国家得不到，这对欧洲的团结意味着什么。”
The EU has administered vaccines to 3.22% of its adult population, compared with 15.5% who have had a first jab in the UK. Israel has administered a jab to 60% of its population.
欧盟已经为3.22%的成年人接种了疫苗，而在英国，已经有15.5%的人进行了首次接种。以色列则已经给60%的人口注射了疫苗。
欧盟已经为3.22%的成年人接种了疫苗，而在英国，已经有15.5%的人进行了首次接种。以色列则已经给60%的人口注射了疫苗。
Von der Leyen said the chief cause of the difference in timescales between the EU and the UK was the slower authorisation process undertaken by the European Medicines Agency than that open to national regulators.
冯·德莱恩表示，欧盟和英国在时间上存在差异的主要原因是，欧洲药品管理局的批准过程比各国监管机构批准的过程要慢。
冯·德莱恩表示，欧盟和英国在时间上存在差异的主要原因是，欧洲药品管理局的批准过程比各国监管机构批准的过程要慢。
She said: “The UK has chosen the route of emergency marketing authorisations. We have chosen another, and we believe it is the right one.
她说：“英国已经选择了紧急上市许可的途径。我们选择了另一条途径，我们相信它是正确的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
她说：“英国已经选择了紧急上市许可的途径。我们选择了另一条途径，我们相信它是正确的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“Israel is also often cited as a model of success. The country is highly digitalised – and that’s good – but personal health data is given to companies there. This is not something we would want to do in the EU.”
“以色列也经常被认为是成功的典范。这个国家高度数字化——这很好——但个人健康数据被提供给了那里的公司。这不是我们想在欧盟做的事情。”
“以色列也经常被认为是成功的典范。这个国家高度数字化——这很好——但个人健康数据被提供给了那里的公司。这不是我们想在欧盟做的事情。”
Figures compiled by the data analytics company Airfinity suggest that the US has invested nine times as much as the EU in upscaling manufacturing vaccines although the figures have been disputed by the commission.
数据分析公司Airfinity汇编的数据表明，美国在扩大疫苗生产规模方面的投资是欧盟的9倍，尽管欧盟委员会对这些数据提出了质疑。
数据分析公司Airfinity汇编的数据表明，美国在扩大疫苗生产规模方面的投资是欧盟的9倍，尽管欧盟委员会对这些数据提出了质疑。
But Von der Leyen admitted that the bloc should have put more money into upscaling capacity.
但冯·德莱恩承认，欧盟本应投入更多资金提升产能。
但冯·德莱恩承认，欧盟本应投入更多资金提升产能。
“What I realise, looking in the rearview mirror, is that we should have thought more, in parallel, about mass production and the challenges it poses,” she said. “The industry has never suddenly embarked on such a gamble …
她说：“事后来看，我意识到，我们应该同时更多地思考大规模生产及其带来的挑战。这个行业从来没有突然开始进行这样的赌博……
她说：“事后来看，我意识到，我们应该同时更多地思考大规模生产及其带来的挑战。这个行业从来没有突然开始进行这样的赌博……
“To increase volumes, to set up new supply chains sufficiently upstream, we could have done it earlier. Now we are working with industry to prepare for the possibility of variants of the coronavirus that can resist vaccines.
“为了增加产量，在足够上游的领域建立新的供应链，我们本可以早点这样做。现在，我们正在与业界合作，为可能出现的能抵抗疫苗的新冠病毒变种做好准备。
“为了增加产量，在足够上游的领域建立新的供应链，我们本可以早点这样做。现在，我们正在与业界合作，为可能出现的能抵抗疫苗的新冠病毒变种做好准备。
“We must immediately support science, so that vaccines are adapted as quickly as possible. Because the best lesson learned in recent months is that you never know what will happen in a year. We must be prepared for all eventualities.”
“我们必须立即支持科学，以便尽快调整疫苗。因为最近几个月学到的最好的教训是，你永远不知道一年后会发生什么。我们必须做好万全准备。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“我们必须立即支持科学，以便尽快调整疫苗。因为最近几个月学到的最好的教训是，你永远不知道一年后会发生什么。我们必须做好万全准备。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Last week, the commission had to U-turn on an a move to trigger article 16 of the Northern Ireland protocol in the Brexit withdrawal agreement as part of its attempt to control vaccine exports out of the bloc.
上周，欧盟委员会不得不对启动英国脱欧协议《北爱尔兰议定书》第16条的举措做出180度大转弯，这是该委员会试图控制疫苗从欧盟出口的努力的一部分。
上周，欧盟委员会不得不对启动英国脱欧协议《北爱尔兰议定书》第16条的举措做出180度大转弯，这是该委员会试图控制疫苗从欧盟出口的努力的一部分。
The EU’s executive branch wanted to temporarily override the terms of the treaty to establish a vaccine border on the island of Ireland to ensure that Northern Ireland could not be used as a backdoor for vaccine exports to the UK.
欧盟行政部门希望暂时推翻条约的条款，在爱尔兰岛建立一个疫苗边界，以确保北爱尔兰不会被用作向英国出口疫苗的后门。
欧盟行政部门希望暂时推翻条约的条款，在爱尔兰岛建立一个疫苗边界，以确保北爱尔兰不会被用作向英国出口疫苗的后门。
“We shouldn’t even have thought about article 16,” she said. “I regret it. The commission took around 1,500 decisions in a short period of time and almost 900 emergency decisions under very high pressure.”
她说：“我们当初甚至不应该考虑第16条的。我后悔了。委员会在很短的时间内做出了大约1500项决定，在非常大的压力下做出了近900项紧急决定。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
她说：“我们当初甚至不应该考虑第16条的。我后悔了。委员会在很短的时间内做出了大约1500项决定，在非常大的压力下做出了近900项紧急决定。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Meanwhile, during an awkward trip to Moscow, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs Josep Borrell welcomed the development of Russia’s Sputnik vaccine, adding that it would be welcome given the bloc as “facing a shortage of vaccines”.
与此同时，在一次尴尬的莫斯科之行中，欧盟(E外交事务高级代表约瑟夫·博雷尔对俄罗斯研制出“卫星”疫苗表示欢迎。他补充称，鉴于欧盟“面临疫苗短缺”，这种疫苗将受到欢迎。
与此同时，在一次尴尬的莫斯科之行中，欧盟(E外交事务高级代表约瑟夫·博雷尔对俄罗斯研制出“卫星”疫苗表示欢迎。他补充称，鉴于欧盟“面临疫苗短缺”，这种疫苗将受到欢迎。
“It’s good news for the whole of mankind because it means we will have more tools to fight the pandemic,” he said.
他说：“这对全人类来说是好消息，因为这意味着我们将有更多的工具来对抗这种流行病。”
他说：“这对全人类来说是好消息，因为这意味着我们将有更多的工具来对抗这种流行病。”
Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, said that several European countries were “interested in producing the vaccine on their territory”.
俄罗斯外长谢尔盖·拉夫罗夫表示，几个欧洲国家“有兴趣在本国生产这种疫苗”。
俄罗斯外长谢尔盖·拉夫罗夫表示，几个欧洲国家“有兴趣在本国生产这种疫苗”。
The Czech prime minister, Andrej Babiš, said it may consider giving emergency approval to vaccines not approved by the EU regulator while on a visit to Hungary, which is using both the Russian and Chinese vaccines.
捷克总理安德烈表示，在访问匈牙利期间，可能会考虑对欧盟监管机构未批准的疫苗给予紧急批准。匈牙利目前正在使用俄罗斯和中国的疫苗。
捷克总理安德烈表示，在访问匈牙利期间，可能会考虑对欧盟监管机构未批准的疫苗给予紧急批准。匈牙利目前正在使用俄罗斯和中国的疫苗。
“I have spoken about the Russian vaccine, and about the Chinese vaccine, with Chancellor Merkel, and the chancellor as well as the Bavarian prime minister are unambiguously calling for this vaccine to be approved by the European Medicines Agency,” Babiš said.
安德烈说：“我已经和默克尔总理谈到了俄罗斯疫苗和中国疫苗，并且巴伐利亚首席部长也明确呼吁这种疫苗得到欧洲药品管理局的批准。”
安德烈说：“我已经和默克尔总理谈到了俄罗斯疫苗和中国疫苗，并且巴伐利亚首席部长也明确呼吁这种疫苗得到欧洲药品管理局的批准。”
“Now of course the issue is whether the producer asks for the approval or not, and we of course want to consider, if we get hold of the vaccine, to go the similar way as Hungary did because time is of essence.”
他说：“现在的问题当然是疫苗生产商是否要求批准。如果我们得到疫苗，我们当然会考虑采取和匈牙利一样的方式，因为时间至关重要。”
他说：“现在的问题当然是疫苗生产商是否要求批准。如果我们得到疫苗，我们当然会考虑采取和匈牙利一样的方式，因为时间至关重要。”
评论翻译
blankgap
“I can’t even imagine what it would have meant for Europe, in terms of unity, if one or more member states had access to vaccines and not the others.”
And there you have the crux of the issue. Unity trumps all.
“我甚至无法想象，如果一个或多个成员国能够获得疫苗，而其他成员国得不到，这对欧洲的团结意味着什么。”
这就是问题的症结所在。团结压倒一切。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“I can’t even imagine what it would have meant for Europe, in terms of unity, if one or more member states had access to vaccines and not the others.”
And there you have the crux of the issue. Unity trumps all.
“我甚至无法想象，如果一个或多个成员国能够获得疫苗，而其他成员国得不到，这对欧洲的团结意味着什么。”
这就是问题的症结所在。团结压倒一切。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Mulletatron
Err.. hasn’t that happened anyway? With Germany buying a load of its own?
呃……这种局面不是已经发生了吗？德国自己买了一堆？
Err.. hasn’t that happened anyway? With Germany buying a load of its own?
呃……这种局面不是已经发生了吗？德国自己买了一堆？
Triangle-Walks
It's better than the destructive nationalism that fuels the UK government. The EU was noble in its aims: primarily being making sure vaccine distribution was equitable across the continent. I can't say the same for the UK.
这比推动英国政府的破坏性民族主义要好。欧盟的目标是崇高的：主要是确保疫苗在整个欧洲大陆的公平分配。英国就不一样了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
It's better than the destructive nationalism that fuels the UK government. The EU was noble in its aims: primarily being making sure vaccine distribution was equitable across the continent. I can't say the same for the UK.
这比推动英国政府的破坏性民族主义要好。欧盟的目标是崇高的：主要是确保疫苗在整个欧洲大陆的公平分配。英国就不一样了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
iThinkaLot1
Hahaha what? Vaccines have been given to all UK nations on a per capita basis. Its down to the devolved governments on how they give them out (with Scotland having many difficulties). Nevertheless, its leagues ahead of any EU country.
哈哈哈，你说什么？所有联合王国国家的人都接种了疫苗。这取决于下放的政府如何分配（苏格兰有很多困难）。尽管如此，它还是领先于任何一个欧盟国家。
Hahaha what? Vaccines have been given to all UK nations on a per capita basis. Its down to the devolved governments on how they give them out (with Scotland having many difficulties). Nevertheless, its leagues ahead of any EU country.
哈哈哈，你说什么？所有联合王国国家的人都接种了疫苗。这取决于下放的政府如何分配（苏格兰有很多困难）。尽管如此，它还是领先于任何一个欧盟国家。
Triangle-Walks
The UK undercut the continent, which they have the right to do. The UK government is following their own nationalist agenda so it makes sense. However if everyone else on the continent tried that the entire thing would be far, far worse than it is now.
英国削弱了欧洲大陆，他们有权这么做。英国政府正在遵循自己的民族主义议程，所以这是有道理的。然而，如果欧洲大陆上的其他人都这么做的话，整个情况会比现在糟糕得多。
The UK undercut the continent, which they have the right to do. The UK government is following their own nationalist agenda so it makes sense. However if everyone else on the continent tried that the entire thing would be far, far worse than it is now.
英国削弱了欧洲大陆，他们有权这么做。英国政府正在遵循自己的民族主义议程，所以这是有道理的。然而，如果欧洲大陆上的其他人都这么做的话，整个情况会比现在糟糕得多。
iThinkaLot1
Wait, how did the UK “undercut the continent”? The UK signed most of their vaccine contracts months before the EU signed any.
nationalist agenda
What is a nationalist agenda in this instance? Vaccinating your population? Because if so, every country in the world is pursuing a nationalist agenda. It just so happens that the UK is doing best at it (or second best, technically). But we are not doing it at the detriment of other countries. Especially when you look at our financial contributions to Novavax programme. Or our contributions to the Oxford vaccine which is being made at a cost. Or the fact we are conducting half the world’s genomic sequencing and expanding this to countries unable to conduct this to help identify new strains.
Admit it, the EU fucked up when it came to vaccine procurement and the UK has done well (arguably one of the best countries in the world in this instance). Excuses can be made for the EU’s fuck ups when it came to contracts (not really) but they really fucked it when they started what was essentially a vaccine war on the UK when we never even did anything and it was between them and AstraZeneca. It was clear they did this because they were looking for a scapegoat and the UK was an easy target. Oh how it backfired.
等等，英国是怎么“削弱了欧洲大陆”的？英国比欧盟早几个月签署了大部分疫苗合同。
“民族主义议程”
在这种情况下，民族主义的议程指的是什么？为自己的人口接种疫苗吗？因为如果是这样的话，那么世界上每个国家都在追求民族主义议程。巧合的是，英国在这方面做得最好（或者从技术上说是第二好）。但我们这样做并没有损害其他国家的利益。特别是当你看到我们对Novavax项目的财政贡献时。或者我们对牛津疫苗的有代价的贡献。或者我们正在进行世界上一半的基因组测序工作，并将这项工作扩展到无法进行这项工作的国家，以帮助识别新菌株。
承认吧，欧盟在疫苗采购方面搞砸了，而英国做得很好（在这方面可以说是世界上最好的国家之一）。欧盟在合同失误方面可以找借口（不是真的），但当他们开始了一场针对英国的疫苗战争时，他们真的搞砸了，而我们甚至什么都没做，这是他们和阿斯利康之间的纠纷。很明显，他们这么做是因为他们在寻找替罪羊，而英国很容易成为目标。哦，结果却适得其反。
Wait, how did the UK “undercut the continent”? The UK signed most of their vaccine contracts months before the EU signed any.
nationalist agenda
What is a nationalist agenda in this instance? Vaccinating your population? Because if so, every country in the world is pursuing a nationalist agenda. It just so happens that the UK is doing best at it (or second best, technically). But we are not doing it at the detriment of other countries. Especially when you look at our financial contributions to Novavax programme. Or our contributions to the Oxford vaccine which is being made at a cost. Or the fact we are conducting half the world’s genomic sequencing and expanding this to countries unable to conduct this to help identify new strains.
Admit it, the EU fucked up when it came to vaccine procurement and the UK has done well (arguably one of the best countries in the world in this instance). Excuses can be made for the EU’s fuck ups when it came to contracts (not really) but they really fucked it when they started what was essentially a vaccine war on the UK when we never even did anything and it was between them and AstraZeneca. It was clear they did this because they were looking for a scapegoat and the UK was an easy target. Oh how it backfired.
等等，英国是怎么“削弱了欧洲大陆”的？英国比欧盟早几个月签署了大部分疫苗合同。
“民族主义议程”
在这种情况下，民族主义的议程指的是什么？为自己的人口接种疫苗吗？因为如果是这样的话，那么世界上每个国家都在追求民族主义议程。巧合的是，英国在这方面做得最好（或者从技术上说是第二好）。但我们这样做并没有损害其他国家的利益。特别是当你看到我们对Novavax项目的财政贡献时。或者我们对牛津疫苗的有代价的贡献。或者我们正在进行世界上一半的基因组测序工作，并将这项工作扩展到无法进行这项工作的国家，以帮助识别新菌株。
承认吧，欧盟在疫苗采购方面搞砸了，而英国做得很好（在这方面可以说是世界上最好的国家之一）。欧盟在合同失误方面可以找借口（不是真的），但当他们开始了一场针对英国的疫苗战争时，他们真的搞砸了，而我们甚至什么都没做，这是他们和阿斯利康之间的纠纷。很明显，他们这么做是因为他们在寻找替罪羊，而英国很容易成为目标。哦，结果却适得其反。
Triangle-Walks
It undercut the continent by pursuing a separate European vaccine procurement program that is in direct competition with the European unx?
It's not illegitimate, the UK has the ability to do that. Not co-operating with the continent was a nationalistic move though. I don't see why you don't think that's the case.
The UK's procurement went well because they only had one real competitor on this continent and it because of its relatively smaller size it could get the ball moving much quicker. If the EU procurement program did not exist and we had all EU 27 + the rest of the continent in direct competition with one another it would have been absolute shitshow.
它推行一个单独的欧洲疫苗采购项目，与欧盟展开直接竞争，从而削弱了欧洲大陆。
这不是非法的，英国有能力这么做。然而，不与欧洲大陆合作就是一种民族主义行为。我不明白你为什么不这么认为。
英国的采购进展顺利，因为他们在这块大陆上只有一个真正的竞争对手，而且由于它相对较小的体量，它可以让事情进展得更快。如果欧盟采购计划不存在，我们让欧盟27国和欧洲大陆的其他国家相互直接竞争，那绝对会变成一场闹剧。
It undercut the continent by pursuing a separate European vaccine procurement program that is in direct competition with the European unx?
It's not illegitimate, the UK has the ability to do that. Not co-operating with the continent was a nationalistic move though. I don't see why you don't think that's the case.
The UK's procurement went well because they only had one real competitor on this continent and it because of its relatively smaller size it could get the ball moving much quicker. If the EU procurement program did not exist and we had all EU 27 + the rest of the continent in direct competition with one another it would have been absolute shitshow.
它推行一个单独的欧洲疫苗采购项目，与欧盟展开直接竞争，从而削弱了欧洲大陆。
这不是非法的，英国有能力这么做。然而，不与欧洲大陆合作就是一种民族主义行为。我不明白你为什么不这么认为。
英国的采购进展顺利，因为他们在这块大陆上只有一个真正的竞争对手，而且由于它相对较小的体量，它可以让事情进展得更快。如果欧盟采购计划不存在，我们让欧盟27国和欧洲大陆的其他国家相互直接竞争，那绝对会变成一场闹剧。
iThinkaLot1
Do we have a different definition of “undercut”?
We were leaving the EU, there was no need to be part of the European vaccine procurement programme, and the shiteshow that was the EU vaccine programme has all but confirmed that.
Not co-operating with the continent
We are co-operating, we have said we will provide vaccines to the continent after we have vaccinated our population (and we will be doing this for free).
The UK’s procurement went well because they only had one real competitor on this continent
Curious, who was the competitor? I didn’t know we were in a competition. We put a pharmaceutical investor in charge of our procurement programme and pretty much allowed her to choose what she thought was most suitable with essentially an unlimited budget. The result was we are one of the leading countries of effective Covid vaccines. The EU on the other hand put an economist in charge who only cared about costs. We negotiated better contracts than the EU and thats no ones fault but the EU.
我们是对“削弱”有不同的定义吗？
我们当时正在脱离欧盟，没有必要参与欧洲疫苗采购计划，而欧盟疫苗采购计划的闹剧几乎已经证实了这一点。
“不与欧洲大陆合作”
我们正在合作，我们已经说过，我们将在为我们的人民接种疫苗后向欧洲大陆提供疫苗（我们将免费提供疫苗）。
“英国的采购进展顺利，因为他们在这块大陆上只有一个真正的竞争对手”
很好奇，谁是那个竞争对手？我不知道我们在（和谁）比赛。我们让一位制药投资者负责我们的采购计划，并允许她选择她认为最合适的项目，而且基本上没有限制的预算。结果就是，我们是有效的新冠疫苗推广计划的领先国家之一。而另一方面，欧盟让一位只关心成本的经济学家负责。我们谈判的合同比欧盟更好，这不是其他人的错，就是欧盟自己的错。
Do we have a different definition of “undercut”?
We were leaving the EU, there was no need to be part of the European vaccine procurement programme, and the shiteshow that was the EU vaccine programme has all but confirmed that.
Not co-operating with the continent
We are co-operating, we have said we will provide vaccines to the continent after we have vaccinated our population (and we will be doing this for free).
The UK’s procurement went well because they only had one real competitor on this continent
Curious, who was the competitor? I didn’t know we were in a competition. We put a pharmaceutical investor in charge of our procurement programme and pretty much allowed her to choose what she thought was most suitable with essentially an unlimited budget. The result was we are one of the leading countries of effective Covid vaccines. The EU on the other hand put an economist in charge who only cared about costs. We negotiated better contracts than the EU and thats no ones fault but the EU.
我们是对“削弱”有不同的定义吗？
我们当时正在脱离欧盟，没有必要参与欧洲疫苗采购计划，而欧盟疫苗采购计划的闹剧几乎已经证实了这一点。
“不与欧洲大陆合作”
我们正在合作，我们已经说过，我们将在为我们的人民接种疫苗后向欧洲大陆提供疫苗（我们将免费提供疫苗）。
“英国的采购进展顺利，因为他们在这块大陆上只有一个真正的竞争对手”
很好奇，谁是那个竞争对手？我不知道我们在（和谁）比赛。我们让一位制药投资者负责我们的采购计划，并允许她选择她认为最合适的项目，而且基本上没有限制的预算。结果就是，我们是有效的新冠疫苗推广计划的领先国家之一。而另一方面，欧盟让一位只关心成本的经济学家负责。我们谈判的合同比欧盟更好，这不是其他人的错，就是欧盟自己的错。
Triangle-Walks
I feel like nothing you've actually wrote here changes what I said. The UK government undercut the EU program and benefited from doing so.
Curious, who was the competitor?
Literally every other entity trying to get priority for vaccines. So on the European continent, the biggest fish there would be the EU. The EU and UK are both competing for a limited number of vaccines (see the AstraZeneca affair).
So yes, the UK benefited in this case. Would it have been so smooth if the EU programme did not exist and the UK had to compete against 28+ nations? Maybe. Would it have worked out better for the continent as a whole? No.
我觉得你在这里写的东西都不会改变我说的话。就是英国政府削弱了欧盟的计划，并从中受益。
“很好奇，谁是那个竞争对手？”
实际上是其他所有想优先获得疫苗的实体。所以在欧洲大陆上，最大的鱼应该是欧盟。欧盟和英国都在争夺数量有限的疫苗（见阿斯利康截胡事件）。
所以，是的，英国在这个情况下受益。如果欧盟计划不存在，英国不得不与28个以上的国家竞争，情况还会如此顺利吗？也许吧。但对整个欧洲来说，这样做会不会更好？不会。
I feel like nothing you've actually wrote here changes what I said. The UK government undercut the EU program and benefited from doing so.
Curious, who was the competitor?
Literally every other entity trying to get priority for vaccines. So on the European continent, the biggest fish there would be the EU. The EU and UK are both competing for a limited number of vaccines (see the AstraZeneca affair).
So yes, the UK benefited in this case. Would it have been so smooth if the EU programme did not exist and the UK had to compete against 28+ nations? Maybe. Would it have worked out better for the continent as a whole? No.
我觉得你在这里写的东西都不会改变我说的话。就是英国政府削弱了欧盟的计划，并从中受益。
“很好奇，谁是那个竞争对手？”
实际上是其他所有想优先获得疫苗的实体。所以在欧洲大陆上，最大的鱼应该是欧盟。欧盟和英国都在争夺数量有限的疫苗（见阿斯利康截胡事件）。
所以，是的，英国在这个情况下受益。如果欧盟计划不存在，英国不得不与28个以上的国家竞争，情况还会如此顺利吗？也许吧。但对整个欧洲来说，这样做会不会更好？不会。
ApolloNeed
She is literally saying EU unity was prioritised over faster individual vaccine rollout for members. Lives are of lower priority in her view to EU unity. How can anyone defend this stance?
冯·德莱恩的意思是，欧盟的团结优先于成员国更快地推广个人疫苗。在她看来，与欧盟团结相比，生命不是那么重要。有谁能为这种立场辩护？
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
She is literally saying EU unity was prioritised over faster individual vaccine rollout for members. Lives are of lower priority in her view to EU unity. How can anyone defend this stance?
冯·德莱恩的意思是，欧盟的团结优先于成员国更快地推广个人疫苗。在她看来，与欧盟团结相比，生命不是那么重要。有谁能为这种立场辩护？
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
PropofolkillsIrish
I don’t think anyone would but then again, that’s your spin on what she said. If the EU had left individual members to fight amongst themselves to procure and Portuguese and Irish people died whilst Germans and French dined out in open economies, that would be very destructive to EU solidarity. If the EU offered a procurement scheme that instead allowed for fair and even distribution amongst members, irrespective of size and political power, that would be good. The fact that the procurement process itself and manufacturing faltered doesn’t negate that principle. And in addition , the EU did not mandate members to join, each country was free to procure on their own.
我觉得没人会这么想，不过话说回来，这是你对她说的话的歪曲。如果欧盟任由成员国为了采购而自相残杀，葡萄牙和爱尔兰人死去，而德国和法国人却在开放经济体中外出就餐，这将对欧盟团结造成极大的破坏。如果欧盟提供一个采购计划，允许成员国之间公平、公平地分配，而不考虑成员国的规模和政治权力，那将是一件好事。采购过程本身和生产过程的停滞不前并不能否定这一原则。此外，欧盟并没有强制成员国加入，每个国家都可以自行购买。
I don’t think anyone would but then again, that’s your spin on what she said. If the EU had left individual members to fight amongst themselves to procure and Portuguese and Irish people died whilst Germans and French dined out in open economies, that would be very destructive to EU solidarity. If the EU offered a procurement scheme that instead allowed for fair and even distribution amongst members, irrespective of size and political power, that would be good. The fact that the procurement process itself and manufacturing faltered doesn’t negate that principle. And in addition , the EU did not mandate members to join, each country was free to procure on their own.
我觉得没人会这么想，不过话说回来，这是你对她说的话的歪曲。如果欧盟任由成员国为了采购而自相残杀，葡萄牙和爱尔兰人死去，而德国和法国人却在开放经济体中外出就餐，这将对欧盟团结造成极大的破坏。如果欧盟提供一个采购计划，允许成员国之间公平、公平地分配，而不考虑成员国的规模和政治权力，那将是一件好事。采购过程本身和生产过程的停滞不前并不能否定这一原则。此外，欧盟并没有强制成员国加入，每个国家都可以自行购买。
the-player-of-games
Yes, how shocking that Greek and Croatian lives matter as much as the lives of those from richer and more capable countries like Germany.
是的，希腊人和克罗地亚人的生命和来自德国等更富裕、更有能力国家的人的生命一样重要，这是多么令人震惊啊。
Yes, how shocking that Greek and Croatian lives matter as much as the lives of those from richer and more capable countries like Germany.
是的，希腊人和克罗地亚人的生命和来自德国等更富裕、更有能力国家的人的生命一样重要，这是多么令人震惊啊。
blankgap
It’s clear, however, that the whole EU will be disadvantaged because the EU messed up the vaccine procurement. So in the short term the push for ‘unity’ actually didn’t help anyone.
I don’t disagree with the principle regarding everyone having fair access to vaccines, I am just pointing out that due to the EUs bureaucracy and unremitting focus on unity above all else, they’ve actually shot themselves in the foot.
然而，很明显，由于欧盟搞砸了疫苗采购，整个欧盟将处于不利地位。所以在短期内，推动“团结”实际上对任何人都没有帮助。
我并不反对关于每个人都能公平获得疫苗的原则，我只是指出，由于欧盟的官僚主义和对团结高于一切的不懈关注，他们实际上是在搬起石头砸自己的脚。
It’s clear, however, that the whole EU will be disadvantaged because the EU messed up the vaccine procurement. So in the short term the push for ‘unity’ actually didn’t help anyone.
I don’t disagree with the principle regarding everyone having fair access to vaccines, I am just pointing out that due to the EUs bureaucracy and unremitting focus on unity above all else, they’ve actually shot themselves in the foot.
然而，很明显，由于欧盟搞砸了疫苗采购，整个欧盟将处于不利地位。所以在短期内，推动“团结”实际上对任何人都没有帮助。
我并不反对关于每个人都能公平获得疫苗的原则，我只是指出，由于欧盟的官僚主义和对团结高于一切的不懈关注，他们实际上是在搬起石头砸自己的脚。
the-player-of-games
The whole EU is not disadvantaged. Some countries where vaccine research and development are happening, they are getting fewer doses at this time, because these are being exported to 27 countries. Most of these countries would never get these many doses until much later, if on their own.
整个欧盟并没有处于不利地位。一些正在进行疫苗研究和开发的国家，目前它们得到的剂量更少，因为这些疫苗出口到27个国家。这些国家中的大多数要到很久以后才会得到这么多的剂量。
The whole EU is not disadvantaged. Some countries where vaccine research and development are happening, they are getting fewer doses at this time, because these are being exported to 27 countries. Most of these countries would never get these many doses until much later, if on their own.
整个欧盟并没有处于不利地位。一些正在进行疫苗研究和开发的国家，目前它们得到的剂量更少，因为这些疫苗出口到27个国家。这些国家中的大多数要到很久以后才会得到这么多的剂量。
blankgap
That is a completely false assertion. It suits nobody if rollout is slower in certain parts of the world. We all want to get back to normal.
The EUs rollout has been comparatively slow. You cannot deny there have been problems. Just look at what happened 2 weeks ago. One of the reasons for that has been down to the EUs bureaucratic approach and the need to find agreement with 27 separate stakeholders.
这是一个完全错误的断言。如果在世界某些地区的推出速度较慢，它就不适合任何人。我们都想回归正常。
欧盟的推广相对缓慢。你不能否认问题确实存在。看看两周前发生了什么。原因之一是欧盟的官僚作风，以及需要与27个不同的利益相关者都达成协议。
That is a completely false assertion. It suits nobody if rollout is slower in certain parts of the world. We all want to get back to normal.
The EUs rollout has been comparatively slow. You cannot deny there have been problems. Just look at what happened 2 weeks ago. One of the reasons for that has been down to the EUs bureaucratic approach and the need to find agreement with 27 separate stakeholders.
这是一个完全错误的断言。如果在世界某些地区的推出速度较慢，它就不适合任何人。我们都想回归正常。
欧盟的推广相对缓慢。你不能否认问题确实存在。看看两周前发生了什么。原因之一是欧盟的官僚作风，以及需要与27个不同的利益相关者都达成协议。
SorcerousSinner
Unity and fairness often have a trade off.
All countries likely erred by not letting the market play a greater role for vaccine distribution if total number of lives is what counts. But it would have caused an outrage
团结和公平往往是有代价的。
如果生命总数是最重要的，那么所有国家都可能犯了错误——没有让市场在疫苗分发方面发挥更大的作用。但这么做会引起众怒
Unity and fairness often have a trade off.
All countries likely erred by not letting the market play a greater role for vaccine distribution if total number of lives is what counts. But it would have caused an outrage
团结和公平往往是有代价的。
如果生命总数是最重要的，那么所有国家都可能犯了错误——没有让市场在疫苗分发方面发挥更大的作用。但这么做会引起众怒
ApolloNeed
The trade off in this case is the death of citizens.
在这种情况下，代价是公民的死亡。
The trade off in this case is the death of citizens.
在这种情况下，代价是公民的死亡。
Prustage
Totally true and valid. The speedboat approach would make no sense for Europe. If one country shot ahead then any gains would be quickly neutralised as people from neighbouring countries crossed the border. The slow and steady approach is the right way for Europe.
The UK, on the other hand, is an island. We can utilise the advantage that gives us and go for the speedboat approach, then control our borders carefully.
完全真实有效。这种快艇式的做法对欧洲来说毫无意义。如果一个国家突飞猛进，那么随着邻国的人越过边界（避难），任何进展都会很快被抵消。对欧洲来说，缓慢而稳定的做法才是正确的。
另一方面，英国是一个岛国。我们可以利用这一优势，采用快艇的做法，然后小心地控制边境。
Totally true and valid. The speedboat approach would make no sense for Europe. If one country shot ahead then any gains would be quickly neutralised as people from neighbouring countries crossed the border. The slow and steady approach is the right way for Europe.
The UK, on the other hand, is an island. We can utilise the advantage that gives us and go for the speedboat approach, then control our borders carefully.
完全真实有效。这种快艇式的做法对欧洲来说毫无意义。如果一个国家突飞猛进，那么随着邻国的人越过边界（避难），任何进展都会很快被抵消。对欧洲来说，缓慢而稳定的做法才是正确的。
另一方面，英国是一个岛国。我们可以利用这一优势，采用快艇的做法，然后小心地控制边境。
falconfalcon7
They have way more buying power than the UK, they could have used this to their advantage. Instead they published white papers and negotiated based on cost. They had the time and the resources to be 'speed boats'
欧盟的购买力比英国强多了，他们本可以利用这一点的。相反，他们发表了白皮书，并根据成本进行谈判。他们本来有时间和资源成为“快艇”的（却被他们自己浪费掉了）
They have way more buying power than the UK, they could have used this to their advantage. Instead they published white papers and negotiated based on cost. They had the time and the resources to be 'speed boats'
欧盟的购买力比英国强多了，他们本可以利用这一点的。相反，他们发表了白皮书，并根据成本进行谈判。他们本来有时间和资源成为“快艇”的（却被他们自己浪费掉了）
major_clanger
This feels an apt analogy. I don't think the EU should have remit in areas that require fast movement and taking risks - areas such as defence, health, fiscal policy etc.
It's best suited to more long term projects such as trade, standards & legal alignment, that by their very nature are more ponderous.
I do take on board that it wouldn't be good for smaller member states to be elbowed out by the bigger ones for vaccines, but I'm now convinced it would have better for the EU as a whole for countries to compete on vaccine production - as that'd have resulted in far more money being invested overall, much earlier, leading to more vaccines manufactured faster, and then the surplus would have been distributed to smaller countries, or those who'd bet on the wrong vaccine.
这似乎是一个恰当的比喻。我认为欧盟不应该在那些需要快速行动和冒险的领域——比如国防、卫生、财政政策等领域——拥有权限。
它最适合于更长期的项目，比如贸易、标准和法律调整，它们的本质是更沉重的。
我确实认为，在疫苗方面，较小的成员国被较大的成员国排挤出去是不好的，但我现在相信，让各国在疫苗生产方面展开竞争对整个欧盟更有利，因为那样会导致更多的资金投入，更早，更快地生产出更多的疫苗，然后剩余的资金就会分配给较小的国家，或者那些押错了赌注的国家。
This feels an apt analogy. I don't think the EU should have remit in areas that require fast movement and taking risks - areas such as defence, health, fiscal policy etc.
It's best suited to more long term projects such as trade, standards & legal alignment, that by their very nature are more ponderous.
I do take on board that it wouldn't be good for smaller member states to be elbowed out by the bigger ones for vaccines, but I'm now convinced it would have better for the EU as a whole for countries to compete on vaccine production - as that'd have resulted in far more money being invested overall, much earlier, leading to more vaccines manufactured faster, and then the surplus would have been distributed to smaller countries, or those who'd bet on the wrong vaccine.
这似乎是一个恰当的比喻。我认为欧盟不应该在那些需要快速行动和冒险的领域——比如国防、卫生、财政政策等领域——拥有权限。
它最适合于更长期的项目，比如贸易、标准和法律调整，它们的本质是更沉重的。
我确实认为，在疫苗方面，较小的成员国被较大的成员国排挤出去是不好的，但我现在相信，让各国在疫苗生产方面展开竞争对整个欧盟更有利，因为那样会导致更多的资金投入，更早，更快地生产出更多的疫苗，然后剩余的资金就会分配给较小的国家，或者那些押错了赌注的国家。
Mr_Leek
If that was the EU model for operation I wonder if it would have shutdown any meaningful attempt at Brexit.
There’s logical arguments that increased EU monetary policy makes the single market work more efficiently, but individual nations were able to trade fairly well before the Euro came along.
(I confess that I don’t know anywhere near enough to make an informed answer on where to draw the EU integration line)
如果这是欧盟的运作模式，我想知道它是否会关闭任何有意义的脱欧尝试。
有一种合乎逻辑的观点认为，增加的欧盟货币政策使单一市场的运作更加有效，但在欧元出现之前，单个国家的交易就已经相当顺畅了。
（我承认，我还不清楚欧盟一体化的界限在哪里）
If that was the EU model for operation I wonder if it would have shutdown any meaningful attempt at Brexit.
There’s logical arguments that increased EU monetary policy makes the single market work more efficiently, but individual nations were able to trade fairly well before the Euro came along.
(I confess that I don’t know anywhere near enough to make an informed answer on where to draw the EU integration line)
如果这是欧盟的运作模式，我想知道它是否会关闭任何有意义的脱欧尝试。
有一种合乎逻辑的观点认为，增加的欧盟货币政策使单一市场的运作更加有效，但在欧元出现之前，单个国家的交易就已经相当顺畅了。
（我承认，我还不清楚欧盟一体化的界限在哪里）
PoliticalOutsider
Tankers pollute heavily and are prone to disastrous oil spills.
Which the EU has metaphorically demonstrated perfectly already.
油轮污染严重，极易发生灾难性的溢油事故。
这一点欧盟已经完美地证明了。
Tankers pollute heavily and are prone to disastrous oil spills.
Which the EU has metaphorically demonstrated perfectly already.
油轮污染严重，极易发生灾难性的溢油事故。
这一点欧盟已经完美地证明了。
Rob-With-One-B
If we're using ship metaphors, then I shall say that we are the turbine-powered HMS Dreadnought to the continent's lumbering, obsolete collection of ironclads.
如果我们用的是船的比喻，那么我将说我们是由涡轮驱动的皇家海军无畏舰，而不是欧洲大陆的那些笨重、过时的铁甲舰队。
If we're using ship metaphors, then I shall say that we are the turbine-powered HMS Dreadnought to the continent's lumbering, obsolete collection of ironclads.
如果我们用的是船的比喻，那么我将说我们是由涡轮驱动的皇家海军无畏舰，而不是欧洲大陆的那些笨重、过时的铁甲舰队。
Anglo_Sexan
Glad we left the EU to be free of being obsessed with what European politicians are saying.
很高兴我们离开了欧盟，不拥再为欧洲政客的言论所困扰了。
Glad we left the EU to be free of being obsessed with what European politicians are saying.
很高兴我们离开了欧盟，不拥再为欧洲政客的言论所困扰了。
很赞 1
收藏