Yesterday in Westminster Hall, MPs debated the Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response: International Agreement. Over 150,000 signed the petition to “not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum”. They don’t want the Government to commit to signing an international treaty unless it is approved through a public referendum.
Steve Brine MP said he was “puzzled by the debate”. We are too.
So, what is the Treaty about, and should we be concerned?
The WHO wants member states to negotiate a new international instrument to advance collective action for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.
In March 2021, world leaders, including Boris Johnson, announced the need for a treaty to enhance international pandemic cooperation. In October, a WHO working group published a ‘zero draft’ report for consideration by the World Health Assembly (WHA), the WHO’s decision-making body. As a result, the WHA convened a second special session in December, where it established an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) to draft and negotiate the instrument with a view to its adoption under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution. Article 19 of the WHO’S Constitution gives the WHA the authority to adopt conventions or agreements on any matter within WHO’s competence.
Does the U.K. support the treaty? Well, Boris Johnson, as Prime Minister, was a signatory. In May 2022, the Government responded to the petition, stating it supported “a new legally-binding instrument.”
Government support that is pledged despite not knowing the substance of what is being proposed: the Government supports a new treaty “as part of a cooperative and comprehensive approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response”.
The zero draft for consideration was reported at the fourth INB meeting – known as the WHO CA+. The aim of the CA+ is “a world where pandemics are effectively controlled”. Have we learnt anything about respiratory agents?
One of the aims of the CA+ is confusing: it states it wants to “achieve universal health coverage”. But, the concept of universal health coverage is based on the 1948 WHO Constitution, which declares health a fundamental human right and commits to ensuring the highest attainable level of health for all – therefore, why should universal coverage be reserved for pandemics?
One of the primary reasons underpinning the treaty is the “recognition of the catastrophic failure of the international community to show solidarity and equity in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic”. There’s no need then for vital reflection on how we got it so wrong – it’s not just more of the same; this treaty sets out it will be much more.
Currently, the negotiating team is looking into the definition, means and procedure for declaring a pandemic, what this means in practice, how to finance pandemic preparedness and response initiatives and the setting up of a new Governing Body for overseeing the treaty.
It’s not all bad news: manufacturers are well catered for. Article 7(3a) states:
During inter-pandemic times all parties will coordinate, collaborate, facilitate and incentivise manufacturers of pandemic-related products to transfer relevant technology and know-how to capable manufacturer(s) (as defined below) on mutually agreed terms, including through technology transfer hubs and product development partnerships, and to address the needs to develop new pandemic-related products in a short time frame.
The petition asks for a referendum to decide whether the treaty will proceed. This isn’t going to happen – once the political will is in place, there’s little to stop the progress unless a block of countries at the WHA objects.
The issues that concern us are the definition, the costs and the actors.
We have previously noted the problems with defining a pandemic, and issues with the elusive definition of pandemic influenza have been pointed out as far back as 2011 when the need for any impact on morbidity and mortality was removed. Instead, all you needed was the worldwide spread of a new disease “against which the population has no immunity”.
There are also no widely accepted definitions for the end of the pandemic – who knows when this one will end?
As for the costs: Article 19(1c) of the draft report states:
Commit to prioritise and increase or maintain, including through greater collaboration between the health, finance and private sectors, as appropriate, domestic funding by allocating in its annual budgets not lower than 5% of its current health expenditure to pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery, notably for improving and sustaining relevant capacities and working to achieve universal health coverage. (emphasis added)
Has anyone considered the cost? Five per cent is roughly £7.5 billion for England and Wales – about half the General Practice budget gone. Any answers on what the XX% of GDP referred to below might add up to are much appreciated.
Commit to allocate, in accordance with its respective capacities, XX% of its gross domestic product for international cooperation and assistance on pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery, particularly for developing countries, including through international organisations and existing and new mechanisms.
As for the actors in all this, there will be many. Global politics is an excellent distractor for domestic problems; the WHO Global Pandemic Supply Chain and Logistics Network will ensure numerous opportunities for industry, and academia will gladly go along with an agenda that promises $XXX funding opportunities. At the centre will be the WHO – primarily a political organisation; it is essential that the past mistakes of the influenza narrative are not repeated.
In 2010, key scientists advising the WHO on pandemic planning had done paid work for industry that stood to gain from the guidance they authored. Deborah Cohen’s investigation showed that key experts contributing to the plan were conflicted. As a result, the definition of a pandemic was altered, billions of pounds of antivirals were stockpiled, and the WHO’s warning of two billion influenza H1N1 cases never materialised.
There’s been a lot (rightly) made about this treaty ceding power to an unelected body.
The treaty will be a legally binding instrument. There may be some downplaying of this when folk realise the implications. However, if a party wants to leave, it can do so at any time within two years from the date the WHO CA+ entered into force. But we will have to give one year’s notice (it’s unclear what happens after two years).
And as if you don’t need to be any more concerned, any party may propose amendments to the WHO CA+ that can be adopted by a two-thirds majority vote of the Parties present and voting at the session.
The INB will submit the treaty for consideration by the 77th World Health Assembly in May 2024. As Esther McVey said, we need “robust debate and an open review” of the plans.
Once the treaty is in force – to make it relevant and the political effort worthwhile – all you’ll need is another pandemic.
We do not need to spell out the catastrophic failures of the last three years. For now, just think that the same people are in charge and as our series on the UKHSA ‘evidence base’ for mask mandates shows, they do not care what any of us think.
This is not a U.K. problem, and we urge our non-U.K. readers to spread the word and, if they agree, our grave concerns.
We’ll be watching; we’ll keep you posted and keep writing. Somebody somewhere will take notice, perhaps.
Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack blog, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
What would these ”completely different set of circumstances” look like then? Do give us a clue, lady. This BS is so blatantly a strategy to mess with the minds of the British public and keep them waiting and wondering as we head into the winter months. Has ‘flu season’ been reinstated btw? Or has it been redefined as ‘Covid season’ for now and ever more? Because how many people have a box of flu tests at home or carried out as protocol if you go into hospital? It’ll be Covid World once more, you watch. So what this woman is alluding to I have no idea, but what I’m wondering is if she’d even pass the litmus test that any sane person should pass with flying colours, and tell us what a woman is.
Hosepipe ban, anyone?
Perhaps this is what she’s hinting at. Same old same old BBC bilge, which allows for the reintroduction of flu as a perceived ‘threat’, because we know they’ve got many flu jabs they need to use up and earn money on. But if that’s the case ( ‘case’ being the operative word here ) then do we now have LFT/PCR tests which supposedly detect flu? Or are they basically just banking on ”scaring the pants off” enough people to get them queuing up for their Jonestown jabs? Yeah, keep sucking up your daily dose of Kool-Aid and pledging your allegiance to the Covidian cult!
”Covid will “continue to surprise us”, England’s deputy chief medical officer has warned ahead of another tricky winter for the NHS.
Dr Thomas Waite says the disease does not yet behave in a seasonal way, making it less predictable than other winter illnesses.
He encourages anyone eligible for the free flu and/or Covid vaccine to get the jabs and protect their health.
Last year the flu vaccine stopped 25,000 people from being hospitalised.
But scientists estimate that last winter in England, flu still caused more than 14 thousand excess deaths and Covid caused more than ten thousand.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-66963982
What this disingenuous POS is saying is that she has been tipped the wink that another “pandemic” is on the way. She also knows that one of the most successful ways of disrupting society is to close schools. However, she has to present ‘reasonableness’ so states that closing schools is only an option.
The teaching unions now know that more than a couple of sniffles per class would provide hefty ammunition for an out brothers out.
Looks like everything is in place for the Davos Deviants.
Back in March 2020 there was an interview with a Korean COVID-19 expert and as well as the assertions that China controlled this well with strong restrictions, there was this answer about education.
Stephen Park (Interviewer): “In Korea the start of the school is being postponed, people are practicing social distancing, and the government even sends regular updates via texts. How well do you think this is all being handled?”
Professor Kim Woo-joo “On March 20th, a couple days ago, the prime minister made a special announcement that he strongly recommends social distancing. So religious facilities, places people hang out, like bars, and indoor gyms… From march 20 for 2 weeks, these 3 types of places were strongly recommended to shut down. But this is not mandatory. People who are over 50 or 60 are following these protocols well. But teens and those in their 20s are not, because for teens in Korea, their education is very important. Even if they are sick and have a fever, they have to go to school and academy. The school year was postponed for elementary, middle, and high school because of COVID-19, but in the evening kids go to academies. So even if the government pushed back school, kids will still go to academy to study at night. Since I checked last weekend 90% of academies are open. In Asia, the college you go to determines your future.”
So not only did the kids continue their education, even when infected, but they were taught, presumably by someone much older!!!
Evidence is at 25:11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAk7aX5hksU&t=1808s
You Need To Listen To This Leading COVID-19 Expert From South Korea | STAY CURIOUS #15
Also, notice that this Professor is a Covid expert and in the same month that the pandemic was declared. That’s pretty good going as I thought becoming an expert in something can take years, if not decades.
This Disease X keeps coming up, like we’re being primed for the WHO/IHR tyranny.
In a different time, before the covid terror, that would have sounded like a sensible statement that one never knows what one may encounter in the future. It would have sounded like a very innocuous hypothetical statement.
But, after the covid terror, anything other than a rejection of lockdowns sounds downright menacing, because now we know the establishment is capable of terrible things we never imagined them capable of.
“Key lessons have still not been learned.”
There was NO pandemic.
Yes, hux, but you’re forgetting one minor but integral detail for successfully existing in Clown World; facts don’t matter. haha..
https://twitter.com/CartlandDavid/status/1708916535916388753/photo/1
What she means is that if the WHO warns us of a possible threat, then we must close down again. Oh, hang on, the WHO ammendamant comes into enforce on 1st December- the one where they can take away you ‘rights’.
I pity the fool.
https://twitter.com/MrT/status/1707487247119835456
What a stupid man.
If the adults don’t tolerate a lockdown then the children won’t have to.
Seriously though, did this happen today? Is it open season for just taking the Mick and rubbing the jab injured and bereaved people’s noses in it? Another AZ stooge has been knighted.
https://twitter.com/CartlandDavid/status/1708917693498147263
Bearing in mind they knew coronie was 99% survivable in 2020, one has to wonder if they have any limits on what they will do given whichever circumstances they choose to manipulate?
https://www.kusi.com/carlsbad-school-district-parents-hold-parking-lot-protest-in-support-of-reopening-schools/
Lets not forget that excess deaths are currently significantly above normal and not a peep from MSM or Govt…
Stange innit?
You only need watch the first 1 or 2 mins of this clip about the increase in cardiac arrests in Victoria, Australia, which unfortunately includes an 8yr old girl ( who thankfully survived ) but no acknowledgement of the elephant in the room of course.
https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/status/1708713774130311283
I know there are plenty more intelligent things to say, but for the love of God I wish these bloody people would stop peppering everything they say “y’know…” all the bloody time. I know they’re cretins beyond redemption but for God’s sake just STOP IT!! What do they think they sound like? I would do anything to hear intelligent, well read, articulate people in public office. (The Moggmeister blew it for other reasons).
When all else fails Covid returns
I’m seeing a huge increase in people posting on social media that they have covid. Like it’s a badge of honour. There’s even one in a group I’m in who took three days of tests before she got the positive she clearly desperately wanted. I can’t bring myself to send get well wishes.
It absolutely is a badge of honour. My (fully jabbed, whether that’s 3 or 4 I have no idea) SIL has recently posted a photo of herself on FB, just finishing a half marathon. Absolutely amazing she could complete such a thing, she says, given she had “Covid – The Sequel” JUST THREE WEEKS AGO! What a terrible deadly disease, that you can run 13 miles shortly afterwards looking perfectly healthy. Cue the usual replies – you poor thing, aren’t you brave, isn’t covid terrible etc etc. How many times will they have to “have” it before it stops being newsworthy I wonder? It will be around forever IMO, so there are going to be a lot of “sequels” to boast about.
In other News at the Tory conference, BBC Evan Davis interviewed a Tory over 15 minute cities saying they’re just about everything in one place and everything else is a conspiracy theory. It was around 17:30 today Radio 4. The Tory guy said how residents are concerned about their freedom of movement etc while not mentioning Agenda 2030 where all the information is.
Keegan is dreadful, shouldn’t be in charge of any portfolio and certainly not children or health.
‘Asked by the Telegraph whether schools should be classified as critical infrastructure so there is more parliamentary scrutiny ahead of any future closures’, please notice that she doesn’t answer that question. More parliamentary scrutiny would obviously be a good idea (if you still believed in the parliamentary process at all).
These people are not fit for purpose.
They obviously think that trashing the education, mental health and therefore life chances of an entire generation of school-children wasn’t comprehensive enough.
So they need the wriggle room to double-down.
EVIL BASTARDS.