Ayse I have read the entire document, I wouldn't comment otherwise. I’m not a specialist in pharma, not at all. But I read the document from the perspective of an educated non-specialist and have seen many posts that have completely missed the intent of the proposals.
It’s not solely in preparation for us leaving the EU although that is indeed covered. I am happy for specially trained people to vaccinate me, why would I not be? The non-liability is to protect pharmaceutical companies from liability if they are creating vaccines, or as you say other drugs, which have been approved by the licencing authority but not yet licenced. This puts them in the same legal position as the manufacturers and marketing authorisation holders. I think that’s fair. You of course may disagree with all that. You are entitled to your opinion.
But stating that unlicenced vaccine would is a trial vaccine is incorrect and that could mislead people about what the process actually is. I don’t trust the current government either, but until proved wrong I will trust the JCVI and the licencing authority. We do indeed live in a free country and you would be quite entitled to refuse an unlicenced drug, or any drug, I wouldn’t try to dissuade you. But everyone should take that decision with the facts.