Tuesday

17th May 2022

Opinion

Von der Leyen's Pfizer texts - why transparency isn't all good

  • Ursula von der Leyen has a track record of suffering similar technological mishaps before - for instance, Blackberry phones she used as Germany's defence minister were also conveniently wiped out (Photo: Helena Malikova)
Listen to article

The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, is under fire for having lost her text messages with the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla. The charges are not entirely fair – and acting on them risks doing more harm than good.

The EU's ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, said that the commission was guilty of "maladministration" when it failed to publicise the texts following a journalist's request.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

Now, a momentum is building in the European Parliament to hold the commission accountable. "When giant vaccine deals are conducted via text messages, of course it is important for those providing oversight to be able see them," Sophie int'Veld, an influential Dutch MEP, argued.

While transparency is generally desirable in public life, there can also be too much of it. And, in fact, the commission's procurement of vaccines against Covid-19 is a case in point – notwithstanding the current brouhaha over 'Delete-gate'.

To be sure, von der Leyen herself has a track record of suffering similar technological mishaps before. The content of Blackberry phones that she used as Germany's defence minister, containing communications over lucrative government contracts, were also conveniently wiped out ("by negligence") ahead of a Bundestag inquiry.

Yet, there are good reasons to accord her significant leeway in this particular instance.

After all, the main problem afflicting the EU's approach to vaccine procurement, particularly in the autumn and winter months of 2020 was not the commission's excessive and non-transparent coziness with Big Pharma - but rather its risk aversion in face of possible scrutiny from member states, which had delegated it the task of purchasing vaccines for the entire EU.

The commission's early mistake was to do everything by the book, in order to insulate itself from any prospective criticism.

Hence the decision to diversify the vaccine portfolio to include not only Johnson & Johnson and Astra Zeneca, but also the failed Sanofi – instead of aggressively locking in, early on, a sufficient number of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines which were visibly superior.

Only in November of 2020 did the commission place a firm order for 200 million Pfizer doses, with an option for 100 million more, as well as 80 million doses from Moderna, with an option for another 80 million to be delivered at a later date.

The commission went out of its way to negotiate prices that were below those paid by other countries, such as the UK or Israel, preempting any accusations of extravagance.

What may have seemed prudent, however, was inadequate to the challenge posed by the pandemic.

The broader social and economic benefits of getting shots in people's arms exceeded any conceivable cost by one or two orders of magnitude. Protecting people and resuming normal life sooner rather than later was enormously valuable, too.

In short, this was the moment for the commission – and for policymakers across the developed world – to simply ignore the costs and go bold. Doing so, furthermore, would not have compromised the availability of vaccines for other, poorer countries – quite the contrary. The more generous initial bidders are, the easier it becomes for pharmaceutical companies to scale up and build additional capacity.

If anything, Von der Leyen should be applauded for changing the course in the spring of 2021, when the commission faced criticisms (including by myself) in the wake of its altercations with Astra Zeneca, whose deliveries were slipping behind the expected timeline.

In May of 2021, the commission thus announced a new contract with Pfizer to deliver as many as 1.8 billion doses to the EU, at higher price than before (€19.5 compared to €12 and €15.5 for earlier contracts).

The European public and EU governments are perfectly capable of judging for themselves whether the commission did a good job overall – and whether the additional expense was worth it. The amounts ordered (and delivered), the costs, and other contractual terms are all public information.

Deeply misguided

And legal formalities aside, the idea that all communication between the commission's officials and Pfizer should be also revealed to the public is deeply misguided.

For one, this was far from an instance of conventional public procurement, in which public authorities mechanically pick the objectively best bid, based on previously announced criteria. There are only a handful of companies in the world producing adequate vaccines against Covid-19 and their overall supply was long constrained.

It is possible, even probable, that the commission was not in the best position to act in a forward-looking, entrepreneurial manner to incentivise additional supply – particularly compared against the nimble ways in which British and Israeli governments operated – but it should not be penalised for having tried to do so, albeit late.

The corollary of the unfettered transparency that some MEPs are calling for is turning every negotiation, previously conducted in private, into a public relations exercise. It suggests that in future crises, public officials should always double down on their risk aversion and their commitment to process above all else – lest their text messages or in-person communications become subjects of public scrutiny.

Of course, the likes of int'Veld have good reasons to seize the present moment to make the European Parliament look appear relevant, in spite of its many shortcomings and its limited role in actual European policymaking.

However, not only is giving more power to the parliament not the answer to the EU's democratic deficit, but also the parliamentarians' current attempt circumscribe the space in which public officials – this time those in the European Commission – can bargain in confidence risks leading to bureaucratic paralysis and ultimately making the EU and its institutions irrelevant.

Author bio

Dalibor Rohac is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Von der Leyen slammed for not revealing Pfizer CEO texts

The European ombudsman has criticised the European Commission for its handling of a request for public access of text messages that were exchanged between president Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla.

Don't Look Up - but for vaccines

Netflix's satirical disaster movie, Don't Look Up, is primarily a warning about our failure to act on climate change but it's plot will seem strangely familiar to anyone who has observed the EU approach to Covid-19 vaccines, particularly patent-waivers.

Podcast

Transparency, Interrupted

The European Union adopted its access regulation at the turn of this century. But as work went digital, the rules have failed to keep pace. A lot still goes unrecorded or unregistered, and cannot be accessed easily, if at all.

Sweden and Finland Nato decision is right for Baltic

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a threat to all Europe, particularly the Baltic. Sweden and Finland must join Nato to secure peace in the Baltic Sea, write the leaders of the EPP Nordic and Baltic delegations in European Parliament.

Will 'Putin's Nato' follow Warsaw Pact into obscurity?

Valdimir Putin's equivalent to Nato — the Collective Security Treaty Organization of Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Armenia, Tajikistan, and Belarus — is convening in Moscow next week to give cover that Russia is not alone in its war against Ukraine.

The EU Parliament Covid inquiry: the questions MEPs must ask

A basic lack of transparency around the EU's vaccines procurement negotiations has prevented effective public and parliamentary scrutiny. It has also made it impossible to answer some of the key questions we put forward here.

News in Brief

  1. EU to protect Finland and Sweden until they join Nato
  2. Poland backs Hungary over frozen 'rule of law' EU funds
  3. EU to reduce size and scope of Mali military mission
  4. Band members testify about Bataclan attack
  5. German prosecutors want five years for alleged ex-Nazi guard
  6. UN urges Iran to halt execution of Swedish-Iranian academic
  7. EU: legal Russian gas payments possible, but not in roubles
  8. McDonald's to sell up and exit Russia

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersClear to proceed - green shipping corridors in the Nordic Region
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers agree on international climate commitments
  3. UNESDA - SOFT DRINKS EUROPEEfficient waste collection schemes, closed-loop recycling and access to recycled content are crucial to transition to a circular economy in Europe
  4. UiPathNo digital future for the EU without Intelligent Automation? Online briefing Link
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersHuge support for Ukraine
  6. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBWorkers want EC to limit subcontracting chains in construction

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us