Interesting article. Why UK gov backed out out of contract with Valneva appears unclear, but this could fit the category of 'the ends justifies the means' politically. Quite why one would back a company with which UK Gov did not reach a commitment certainly is a curious one. I wonder also what the benefit argument must have looked like i.e. how many jobs, reinvestment etc, how much tax raised by French company operating in Scotland? Indeed, on what basis was the decision made?
As I understand things, the UK pulled the deal with Valneva on grounds that post-brexit and pandemic disruptions had created supply issues. So, if true, not sure why supply issues exist at a UK level but not a Scottish level. This further raises questions as to the rationale behind Scottish Enterprise decision to hand Valneva £20m.
Interesting article. Why UK gov backed out out of contract with Valneva appears unclear, but this could fit the category of 'the ends justifies the means' politically. Quite why one would back a company with which UK Gov did not reach a commitment certainly is a curious one. I wonder also what the benefit argument must have looked like i.e. how many jobs, reinvestment etc, how much tax raised by French company operating in Scotland? Indeed, on what basis was the decision made?
As I understand things, the UK pulled the deal with Valneva on grounds that post-brexit and pandemic disruptions had created supply issues. So, if true, not sure why supply issues exist at a UK level but not a Scottish level. This further raises questions as to the rationale behind Scottish Enterprise decision to hand Valneva £20m.