A confluence of consequences is watching the world. The UK reported more than 58,000 COVID-19 cases on Friday, the highest single-day cases since January. In the United States, the governor of New York has imposed a statewide mask mandate. Banks in New York and London require their employees to work from home. In Germany, outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel and her successor Olaf Scholz announced the ban for unvaccinated people from accessing all but the most essential businesses. Austria switches to compulsory vaccination.

The phraseology of the confinements is once again in circulation. The discovery of the Omicron variant last month sparked a flood of pious talk. Not surprisingly, rich world leaders chanted the need to improve access to vaccines. Words, however, are not enough. Honoré de Balzac, the French novelist known for his unfettered views on society, observed “Whoever speaks too much wants to deceive” or “he who speaks too much wants to deceive”. The gulf between speech and walking stinks of hypocrisy.

As early as October 2020, India and South Africa requested from the WTO a temporary exemption from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement (patents, trade secrets, copyrights and industrial designs) for the containment, prevention and treatment of COVID-19. WTO rules require unanimous decisions and the proposal supported by more than 100 countries has barely budged. The virus, meanwhile, has moved freely via variants infecting more than 270 million, causing more than 5.2 million deaths.

The case for vaccine equity was articulated eloquently by WTO Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. “The issue of equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics and therapies is both the moral and economic issue of our time. The causal relationship between access to the vaccine, the spread of the virus, and the loss of human life and livelihoods is undoubtedly established. The circumstances and the specter have not yet convinced opponents, however.

The strongest opposition to immunization waivers comes from the European Union, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, which are home to the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. The EU’s position is not discouraged by appeals from 388 members of the European Parliament and national parliaments or from 375 trade unions. The US supported a temporary waiver but did not come forward with details. The position of rich countries contrasts sharply with that of countries like India and Russia – both have offered waivers on their vaccines.

The UK, for example, argued that although the waiver proposal presents “the international intellectual property system is an obstacle while we still don’t think we’ve seen evidence that it is.” Indeed, the burden of proof – for and against – has been penned in the class wars of the WTO.

Although this is debated, the denial worsened access. The money and the facts speak for themselves. The magnitude of inequalities is illustrated by data from the Duke Global Health Innovation Center. The UK can immunize 323% of its population, the EU 339% of its population and the US 279% of its population. The African Union, on the other hand, barely has enough vaccines to cover a fifth of its population.

The crux of the EU’s opposition concerns returns. At the WTO, the EU argued that intellectual property rights represent a value and are “the legal guarantee of a potential return on investment in innovation”. It’s worth mentioning here that Pfizer is expected to earn over $ 36 billion from vaccine sales in 2021 and Moderna around $ 18 billion.

Either way, the debate is not about the merits of what qualifies as adequate returns or the refusal to reward innovation. It is about providing the means to deal with the pandemic. The challenge for rich countries is to design public policy to absorb the cost of these rewards – through means such as subsidies, tax credits, or acceptable mechanisms. Lessons learned from accessing HIV vaccines can be helpful.

The consequence of increasing infections and the cost of managing economic destruction is evident in the data. In Europe, interest rates are negative at -0.5 percent and inflation is above 5 percent. This is because people are paying to park money even as its value is eroding. In the UK, inflation peaked at 39 years at 6.8% and its economy slowed to zero growth. Across the Atlantic, on Friday, the United States reported consumer inflation never seen since 1980. G7 central bankers must now worry about low growth scenarios at high cost.

The reality that emerges from developed economies is rich in lessons. Obviously, the impression strategy of a collapse in demand is governed by the statute of limitations. Costs are catching up and will rise as the US Federal Reserve moves away from its easy monetary stance. Second, services account for two-thirds of the developed world’s GDP and stimulus measures are not enough to revive the fear-locked face-to-face economy. Importantly, allowance controls can revive demand in the country, but cannot solve supply chain problems in an interdependent globalized world unless the growth of the infection is contained.

The context calls for a revision of the position on vaccine waivers. It is useful to remember that the price paid in terms of eroding economic production will be far greater than the cost of providing access to vaccines. Indeed, no one is safe until everyone is safe.

Shankkar Aiyar
Author of The Gated Republic, Aadhaar: A Biometric History of India’s 12 Digit Revolution, and Accidental India
[email protected]