

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A supermajority of people in G7 countries believe that governments should ensure pharmaceutical companies share the formulas and technology to their vaccines, according to new polling from the People's Vaccine Alliance.
The public believes that pharmaceutical companies should be fairly compensated for developing vaccines, but should be prevented from holding a monopoly on the jabs.
It comes as G7 foreign and development ministers meet in London, the group's first in-person meeting in two years, and the general council of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) meets today online, while India's death toll climbs.
Across G7 nations, an average of 70% of people want the government to ensure vaccine know-how is shared, according to analysis by the People's Vaccine Alliance. Support for government intervention is highest in Italy, where 82% of respondents were in favour, followed by Canada, where 76% agree.
74% in the United Kingdom want the government to prevent Big Pharma monopolies, despite Prime Minister Boris Johnson attributing the country's successful vaccine rollout to "greed and capitalism".
UK support for intervention cuts across political boundaries, backed by 73% of Conservative voters, 83% of Labour and 79% of Liberal Democrats, as well as 83% of Remain and 72% of Leave voters in the EU referendum.
In the United States, where President Joe Biden has voiced his "hope and expectation" for sharing vaccine know-how, 69% of the public support the measure, including 89% of Biden and 65% of Trump voters in 2020. In Japan, 58% of the public want similar action.
European Union member-nations were also strongly in favour, with support from 70% in Germany and 63% in France.
Heidi Chow, Senior Campaigns and Policy Manager at Global Justice Now, said:
"The public doesn't want big pharma to hold monopolies on vaccines that were developed largely with public money. These vaccines are a global public good that should be available to everyone, everywhere. That much is obvious to the public across G7 nations, but political leaders are burying their heads in the sand while people die around them."
Despite widespread support for sharing vaccine know-how, G7 governments have continued to support pharmaceutical monopolies on Covid-19 jabs.
More than 100 countries, led by India and South Africa, have supported a temporary waiver of Intellectual Property rights on Covid-19 vaccines at the WTO, but the proposal has been blocked by countries including the US, UK, Japan, Canada, and the EU. The Biden administration has confirmed it is reconsidering American opposition to the waiver.
Pharmaceutical companies have so far refused to share their vaccine know-how with the world. No company with a successful vaccine has joined the World Health Organisation's Covid-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP), which was established to facilitate sharing blueprints for vaccines and treatments.
Saoirse Fitzpatrick, STOPAIDS Advocacy Manager said:
"The horrific situation in India should shake G7 leaders to their core. Now is not the time for an ideological defence of intellectual property rules. Bilateral deals with pharmaceutical companies have not worked. Governments need to step in and force pharmaceutical companies to share their intellectual property and vaccine know-how with the world."
As G7 chair, the UK has proposed a Pandemic Preparedness Plan, to be discussed by ministers this week, which ignores the issue of monopolies and intellectual property. Pharmaceutical corporations such as Pfizer are on the team preparing the proposal, but developing country governments and vaccine producers have not been asked to join.
Steve Cockburn, Head of Economic and Social Justice at Amnesty International, said:
"G7 governments have clear human rights obligations to put the lives of millions of people across the world ahead of the interests of the pharmaceutical companies that they have funded. It would be a gross failure of leadership to continue blocking the sharing of life-saving technologies, and would only serve to prolong the immense pain and suffering caused by this pandemic."
Last month, 175 former world leaders and Nobel laureates, including Gordon Brown, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Francoise Hollande wrote to President Biden to support the temporary waiving of intellectual property rights for Covid-19 vaccines.
150 faith leaders, including Rowan Williams, the former archbishop of Canterbury, Thabo Makgoba, the Anglican archbishop of Cape Town, and Cardinal Peter Turkson of the Roman Catholic Church have called for G7 leaders to treat Covid-19 as a "global common good.0.
Anna Marriott, Health Policy Manager at Oxfam, said:
"People are dying by the thousands in low and middle income countries while rich nations have jumped the vaccine queue. G7 leaders need to face up to reality. We don't have enough vaccines for everyone and the biggest barrier to increasing supply is that a few profit hungry pharmaceutical corporations keep the rights to produce them under the lock and key. It's time to waive the intellectual property rules, ramp up production and put people's lives before profits. It's time for a People's Vaccine."
Two-thirds of world-leading epidemiologists surveyed warned that the continued spread of the virus could allow vaccine-resistant strains of Covid-19 to render our current vaccines ineffective within a year. Independent SAGE, who provide independent public health advice in the United Kingdom, have called for a patent waiver to address supply issues.
Moderna, Pfizer/BioNtech, Johnson & Johnson, Novovax and Oxford/AstraZeneca received billions in public funding and guaranteed pre-orders, including $12 billion from the US government alone. An estimated 97% of funding for the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine came from public sources.
The companies have paid out a combined $26 billion in dividends and stock buybacks to their shareholders this year, enough to vaccinate at least 1.3 billion people, equivalent to the population of Africa.
ENDS
The People's Vaccine Alliance has analysed polling from across G7 countries conducted by YouGov, Leger360, and Nippon Research Center.
When asked if they support the statement 'Governments should compensate fairly for any COVID-19 vaccine developed by a pharmaceutical company but ensure they don't have a monopoly by sharing these formulas and technology with other approved companies', views reflected by public in each country were:
YouGov UK polling
Sample Size: 1788 UK Adults
Fieldwork: 23rd - 24th February 2021
74% supported the statement. 73% of Conservative voters, 82% of Labour, 79% of Liberal Democrat. 83% of Remain voters and 72% of Leave voters.
YouGov France polling
Sample Size: 1010 adults in France
Fieldwork: 24th - 25th February 2021
63% support the statement
YouGov Germany polling
Sample Size: 2039 adults in Germany
Fieldwork: 24th - 26th February 2021
70% support the statement
YouGov US polling
Sample Size: 1351 adults in the US
Fieldwork: 23rd - 24th February 2021
69% support the statement. 82% of Biden voters and 65% of Trump voters in 2020.
YouGov Italy polling:
Sample size: 1019 adults in Italy
Fieldwork 4th - 5th March 2021
82% support the statement
Leger360 Canada polling:
Sample size: 1526 Canadian adults
Fieldwork 5th - 7th March 2021
76% support the statement
Nippon Research Center Japan polling:
Sample size: 1,278
Fieldwork:17 March 2021
58% supported the statement
Global Justice Now is a democratic social justice organisation working as part of a global movement to challenge the powerful and create a more just and equal world. We mobilise people in the UK for change, and act in solidarity with those fighting injustice, particularly in the global south.
020 7820 4900"I will give," said the Republican mega-donor with a smile.
Billionaire Miram Adelson on Tuesday night suggested the legal obstacles for President Donald Trump to serve an additional term in office after 2028 are not insurmountable as the far-right Republican megadonor vowed another $250 million to bolster a run that experts say would be unlawful and unconstitutional on its face.
Adelson, a hardline Zionist who, along with her now deceased husband, Sheldon Adelson, has given hundreds of millions to US lawmakers who back a strong relationship between the US and Israeli governments, was sharing the podium with Trump during a Hanukkah candlelighting event at the White House when she made the remarks.
With a reference to Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, Adelson said they had discussed "the legal thing of four more years"—something Trump has repeatedly gestured toward and many of his backers have called for—and told Trump, “So, we can do it, think about it.”
A chant in the crowd then broke out for "For four more years!" as Adelson whispered something in Trump's ear.
“She said, ‘Think about it, I’ll give you another $250 million,’” Trump then said into the microphone. "I will give," Adelson said with a smile.
Watch the exchange:
Adelson: I met Alan Dershowitz.. he said.. four more years. We can do it. Think about it.
Crowd: *chants four more years*
Trump: She said think about it, I’ll give you another 250 million pic.twitter.com/eOc7Zazyns
— Acyn (@Acyn) December 17, 2025
For Trump's 2024 presidential campaign alone, Adelson gave at least $100 million to support the Republican candidate with Super PAC she established, according to federal filings.
In his remarks on Tuesday, Trump credited Adelson with providing him $250 million overall—"directly and indirectly"—during his 2024 bid.
"When someone can you $250 million, I think that we should give her the opportunity to say hello," Trump said, when introducing her. "And Miriam, make it quick, because $250 million is not what it used to be."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," warned one Democratic senator.
US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on "all sanctioned oil tankers" approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what's widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.
The "total and complete blockade," Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US "all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us."
"Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America," Trump wrote, referring to the massive US military buildup in the Caribbean. "It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before."
The government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which has mobilized its military in response to the US president's warmongering, denounced Trump's comments as a "grotesque threat" aimed at "stealing the riches that belong to our homeland."
The US-based anti-war group CodePink said in a statement that "Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must 'return' oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective" of his military campaign.
"Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as 'theft' is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy," said CodePink. "A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat."
The announced naval blockade—an act of aggression under international law—came a week after the Trump administration seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela and made clear that it intends to intercept more.
US Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), one of the leaders of a war powers resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from launching a war on Venezuela without congressional approval, said Tuesday that "a naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war."
"A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want," Castro added, noting that a vote on his resolution is set for Thursday. "Every member of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to decide if they support sending Americans into yet another regime change war."
"This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
Human rights organizations have accused the Republican-controlled Congress of abdicating its responsibilities as the Trump administration takes belligerent and illegal actions in international waters and against Venezuela directly, claiming without evidence to be combating drug trafficking.
Last month, Senate Republicans—some of whom are publicly clamoring for the US military to overthrow Maduro's government—voted down a Venezuela war powers resolution. Two GOP senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting the resolution.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Tuesday that "the White House minimized Republican 'yes' votes by promising that Trump would seek Congress’ authorization before initiating hostilities against Venezuela itself."
"Trump today broke that promise to his own party’s lawmakers by ordering a partial blockade on Venezuelan ships," wrote Williams. "A blockade, including a partial one, definitively constitutes an act of war. Trump is starting a war against Venezuela without congressional authorization."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) warned in a television appearance late Monday that members of the Trump administration are "going to do everything they can to get us into this war."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," he added. "This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
"Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it," Sen. Mark Kelly said of administration officials after the meeting.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that the Pentagon will not release unedited video footage of a September airstrike that killed two men who survived an initial strike on a boat allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean Sea, a move that followed a briefing with congressional lawmakers described by one Democrat as an "exercise in futility" and by another as "a joke."
Hegseth said that members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees would be given a chance to view video of the September 2 "double-tap" strike, which experts said was illegal like all the other boat bombings. The secretary did not say whether all congressional lawmakers would be provided access to the footage.
“Of course we’re not going to release a top secret, full, unedited video of that to the general public,” Hegseth told reporters following a closed-door briefing during which he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio fielded questions from lawmakers.
As with a similar briefing earlier this month, Tuesday's meeting left some Democrat attendees with more questions than answers.
“The administration came to this briefing empty-handed,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. “If they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”
That includes preparations for a possible attack on oil-rich Venezuela, which include the deployment of US warships and thousands of troops to the region and the authorization of covert action aimed at toppling the government of longtime Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Tuesday's briefing came as House lawmakers prepare to vote this week on a pair of war powers resolutions aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from waging war on Venezuela. A similar bipartisan resolution recently failed in the Senate.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and co-author of one of the new war powers resolution, said in a statement: “Today’s briefing from Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth was an exercise in futility. It did nothing to address the serious legal, strategic, and moral concerns surrounding the administration’s unprecedented use of US military force in the Caribbean and Pacific."
"As of today, the administration has already carried out 25 such strikes over three months, extrajudicially killing 95 people," Meeks noted. "That this briefing to members of Congress only occurred more than three months since the strikes began—despite numerous requests for classified and public briefings—further proves these operations are unable to withstand scrutiny and lack a defensible legal rationale."
Briefing attendee Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)—who is in the administration's crosshairs for reminding US troops that military rules and international law require them to disobey illegal orders—said of Trump officials, "Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it."
Defending Hegseth's decision to not make the boat strike video public, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) argued that “there’s a lot of members that’s gonna walk out there and that’s gonna leak classified information and there’s gonna be certain ones that you hold accountable."
Mullin singled out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who, along with the Somalian American community at large, has been the target of mounting Islamophobic and racist abuse by Trump and his supporters.
“Not everybody can go through the same background checks that need to be cleared on this,” he said. “Do you think Omar needs all this information? I will say no.”
Rejecting GOP arguments against releasing the video, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said after attending Tuesday's briefing: “I found the legal explanations and the strategic explanations incoherent, but I think the American people should see this video. And all members of Congress should have that opportunity. I certainly want it for myself.”