The UK’s approval of a vaccine is a relief but the government must now overcome huge logistical challenges

After a diet of bad news for almost a year since the pandemic began, the UK’s approval of a coronavirus vaccine is a source of both relief and joy. Boris Johnson’s “cavalry” is no longer another example of his over-optimism that dismays many Conservative MPs, and which helped persuade 55 of them to oppose the new restrictions in England. His cavalry can now be seen clearly on the hill and is heading towards us.  

The speed of the decision by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has raised eyebrows, not least at its EU counterpart, the European Medicines Agency, but there is no need for that to deter people from having the jab. The MHRA, which deservedly enjoys a good reputation around the world, insists it has not “cut corners”, as it has been assessing the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine since June during its development.  

Of course, vaccinating a country of 66 million people will pose huge challenges; it will require the biggest logistical operation since the Second World War. There will also need to be a much better communications campaign than the often chaotic, mixed messages issued by the government in the past nine months. The dangerous anti-vaxxer brigade will need to be taken on and seen off.  

In itself, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine will not end the UK’s war against coronavirus; just over 5 million doses are expected to arrive by the end of this month, fewer than the 10 million ministers had hoped for. Some 800,000 doses will be received initially, enough to immunise 400,000 people, since two doses are needed. In England alone, there are an estimated 400,000 residents and 295,000 workers in care homes, the first group due to be vaccinated under the government’s priority list. It will not be easy to administer the vaccine in care homes because it must be stored at an ultra-low temperature.  

It could take six months to complete the first phase of the rollout, which will also include frontline NHS workers, the clinically vulnerable and everyone aged 50 and over. So Mr Johnson, while understandably welcoming the “fantastic news”, was right to say it does not reduce the need for people to stick to the restrictions.  

Ministers hope that the MHRA will soon authorise the use of the Oxford University-AstraZeneca vaccine, which would speed up the UK’s timetable and, because it can be stored at higher temperatures than the Pfizer-BioNTech one, also play a bigger role around the world. The UK is rightly a generous funder of global efforts such as Gavi and Covax to ensure the poorest countries secure the vaccine, and must use its influence on the world stage, including its presidency of the G7 next year, to make this happen on the ground.

It was regrettable that, on a day that should have united the whole nation, UK ministers could not put narrow party politics to one side for once. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, claimed erroneously that the UK was able to fast-track approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine because it is no longer an EU member; the MHRA pointed out that Britain is covered by EU regulations until the transition period ends on 31 December.

Alok Sharma, the business secretary, said that “in years to come, we will remember this moment as the day the UK led humanity’s charge against this disease”. Pfizer is an American firm and BioNTech is a German company where the breakthrough was made by a married couple, both of whom are the children of Turkish immigrants. This is a truly international effort and should be trumpeted as such, not used to play nationalistic games worthy of Donald Trump.  

Let us hope that ministers choose their words more carefully when progress is made by the Oxford vaccine. Their silly stunts should not distract us from a moment which is a genuine cause for global celebration.