Cracks are forming in the World Health Organisation’s plans to secure a vast expansion of its powers and resources. Presented as a necessarily urgent response to the empirically unsupported assertion that pandemics are increasing in frequency and severity, negotiations for a broad package of amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and a new parallel Pandemic Treaty had been expected to be over by the end of 2023. Having missed that deadline, in late January the Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus pleaded for WHO member states to give ground so that the negotiations could be completed at all. In the same comments he sought to apportion blame for the unexpected headwinds on those who had misconstrued, or misrepresented, the benign intentions of the WHO and its key supporters (which include China and some wealthy private organisations).
Reading between the lines, it appears that Mr. Ghebreyesus and his supporters may finally have realised that the game could soon be up: the strength of opposition to the ambitions of this unelected technocratic administration has compounded rapidly in recent weeks. That opposition has become more evident not only in smaller less influential countries, but in countries which are major contributors to the WHO. Significantly this has included groups of politicians in the U.K. and the U.S. who are seriously alarmed by the vision of a WHO-centred ‘command and control’ public health system, and by the constitutional and public spending implications of these two proposed international agreements.
The Director-General has perhaps realised that his blind ambition has not only put at risk the negotiations that might have elevated his unelected advisory organisation to the status of a supra-national rule-making authority, but is also now starting to jeopardise the future status, funding and membership of the WHO.
Secrecy, opacity and delay
The original timeline presented by the WHO had envisaged a final text of the proposed IHR amendments – where many of the most contentious proposals reside – being published before January 27th 2024, with a view to their adoption taking place at the World Health Assembly meeting scheduled from May 27th to June 1st 2024, alongside adoption of the proposed new Pandemic Treaty. That timeline, although tight, would have allowed four months for negotiators to brief domestic stakeholders, for national legislatures to debate the combined proposals and for any necessary pre-adoption formalities (approvals, technical scrutiny, cost/benefit analyses, etc.) to be completed prior to a vote at the WHA meeting in May.
Yet, on its own initiative, in October 2023 the Working Group for the negotiation of the IHR amendments unilaterally moved its own goalposts so that in place of publishing a final draft text to be scrutinised well in advance of that WHA meeting, it instead committed to circulate by the end of January a copy of the original set of proposed amendments and an interim ‘working draft’ text showing the current state of play. Negotiations would then continue between February and April 2024. It was – and remains – ambiguous whether this move was compatible with the procedural legal requirements already enshrined in the International Health Regulations, but perhaps member states quietly agreed with the WHO secretariat not to look too hard at that issue.
Notwithstanding this commitment, no interim working draft of the IHR amendments appears yet to have been published, and the U.K. officials involved in the negotiations have been inexplicably reluctant to reveal the current position of the text. Indeed, to date all demands for transparency by U.K. parliamentarians have been ignored or deflected by the ministers responsible for the U.K.’s relationship with the WHO. Astonishingly the U.K. Government has refused even to confirm who is negotiating on the U.K.’s behalf.
We understand that the IHR Working Group anticipates a final text being settled only during April or possibly even into May, but there remains no official deadline for it to publish that final text. It refuses to confirm what the documents say, and it refuses to say when it will reveal those documents. If any further evidence were needed of the disregard and disrespect for democratic process and the sovereignty of national parliaments now alleged of the WHO, then surely this is it.
Out of time
That corrosive secrecy, opacity and delay has left a vanishingly narrow window for domestic public health organisations and parliamentarians to review or comment meaningfully on what may become generationally-significant changes to the U.K.’s relationship with the WHO, with other countries and with the public health business community. It means Parliament will have scant opportunity to scrutinise the IHR amendments and the new international funding and resource-sharing commitments enshrined in the parallel Pandemic Treaty. Yet these are documents with the potential to impact materially on the U.K.’s ability to act autonomously, on freedom of speech and opinion, on health security and on the nature of U.K. democracy itself. They also have the potential to commit future generations to very significant public spending obligations.
Given their significance, the IHR proposals and the parallel Pandemic Treaty require a commensurate degree of examination by Parliament. The current nature of the WHO’s funding, 85% of which now comes from private commercially-interested organisations, creates an additional imperative for rigorous, investigative scrutiny. In November 2023, Human Rights Watch wrote that:
The draft [treaty] reflects a process disproportionately guided by corporate demands and the policy positions of high-income governments seeking to protect the power of private actors in health including the pharmaceutical industry.
Without sight of any working drafts of the revised IHRs, nor of the current state of the draft treaty, scrutiny is completely frustrated. At this late stage in the process, after repetitive calls for transparency seemingly have been ignored, one is left to wonder whether this is precisely the intent of the officials involved.
Deferral is the rational solution
As the window for full, fair, candid appraisal by national democratically-elected legislatures is now all but shut, the logical and necessary solution is for member states to demand that any vote to adopt either of these two international accords is held over to the next WHA meeting in May 2025. This will allow ample time both for the conclusion of the negotiations and for member state-level scrutiny of the proposals served up by the negotiating teams.
If it is truly the case that the WHO and its member officials do not intend for national legislatures to cede rule-making sovereignty to an enlarged WHO technocracy, they will surely accept the need for state-level legislatures to control the timing of this process. Calls for deferral have begun, but more voices will be needed to press relevant political leaders and officials to accept that deferral is the only legitimate response to this situation.
A turning point
Even now, in the face of a chorus of rational legally-grounded concerns raised by U.K. parliamentarians about the substance of the proposed amendments and the opacity of the negotiations, the Government has remained steadfastly unwilling to comment on its negotiating intent and objectives, beyond vague platitudes. Efforts by members of the public, legal experts and parliamentarians to understand the current state of negotiations, and even just the arrangements within the U.K. Government to conduct the negotiations, have been stonewalled. The WHO equally has remained virtually mute and offered no meaningful evidence to support claims that its ambitions have been misunderstood.
This has served only to fuel distrust in this process, in the Government and its senior officials, in the U.K.’s relationship with the WHO, and in the WHO’s relationship with its influential funding providers.
Behaviour of this overtly undemocratic nature indicates that the WHO project has long since lost sight of its noble foundations in post-war benevolent multilateralism, and indeed of its reason for being: health for all in pursuit of global peace and security. Unfortunately, the WHO is now a symbol of all that is wrong with what has become a system of global public health patronage. This shamelessly undemocratic and chaotic power grab is also indicative of an organisation which has reached the end of its useful life, at least in its current guise. We suggest that this sorry episode should become the impetus for the U.K. to revisit its relationship with the WHO, and the relationship of the WHO with its funding providers.
The U.K. will not be an outlier if it does so, but rather a role model and – judging by the breadth and strength of international expressions of antipathy for the WHO’s ambitions – a leader of fast followers. This may well be the U.K.’s best post-Brexit opportunity to be an actor of global significance on the international stage.
Molly Kingsley is a founder and Ben Kingsley is the Head of Legal Affairs at children’s rights campaign group UsForThem. Find UsForThem on Substack. Ben and Molly’s new book (co-authored with Arabella Skinner) The Accountability Deficit is available now at Amazon and other book stores.
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.
Wasn’t moderna 3x the dose?!?
It’s high time people were arrested.
The reports are beginning to penetrate the mainstream, and they won’t stop coming. There have been too many victims.
yes, 100mcg vs 30mcg for Pfizer.
Two years too late – Fauci is obviously under the “protection” of “powerful friends” and Johnson always has Carrie as his alibi !
Has Whitty got a new job to go with his Knighthood for “Services Rendered”?
Whitty will probably end up at the WHO – he’s always been a Billy Gates man.
How much longer can these f*****s pushing the jab keep their heads up their arses? Time to take some action against anybody saying they are ‘safe and effective.’ Safe and effective, my arse.
The City of Wolverhampton Council says: “The COVID-19 vaccine is safe, effective and approved. It gives you the best protection against the virus and is saving lives.”
Corona ad seem to be gone from Reading. At least, I don’t remember seeing one for the last couple of days.
Obviously a Council subjected to ‘Virologist Entryism’!
They’re just functionaries repeating ad nauseam what the official Government policy is. There will have been close to zero due diligence done in any local councils on Covid.
The jab kills….. who knew
What I meant was ‘WHO knew’
It doesn’t seem to kill young people very well – Billy Gates must be riling at the inefficiency of his first eugenics exercise!
I’m beginning to get the feeling from reading the latest posts, that we are starting to go around in circles. I always believed that covid-19 was plucked out of thin air, the only ingredients being timing, location, a convenient test and a mRNA vaccine. Everything thereafter relied entirely on governments around the world panicking. Well here we are 2+ years on, a frightened, enfeebled and medicated nation of the compliant, present company excepted. Someone else can finish off
Well here we are 2+ years on, a frightened, enfeebled and medicated world of the compliant, present company excepted.
FTFY
I am far more cynical than you. I am of the belief that the PTB know full well that each ‘crisis’ they create will be exposed as fraud fairly quickly, so they have a long list for ‘bait and switch’ purposes. War in Ukraine, inflation, climate heating, food scare, they’ve got them lined up one after another. I’ve seen through every single one of them already, but most people haven’t. They’re too busy paying for the mortgage and getting their children to sports practice and the like….
The tin foil hat wearer in me has wondered for some time whether the script will ultimately be flipped on these vaccines. There seems to be a concerted effort to sink the West. What better way to do that than to inject ~80% of the population with a toxic substance and then gradually reveal the harm. Think of the lawsuits. Lockdowns, vaccines and Russia sanctions have one thing in common – financial self-immolation. I wonder why.
A part of me thinks the whole Shanghai narrative is to give the West one last push towards mRNA. I heard people saying the reason China was in such a bad way was because they had inferior non mRNA vaccines.
There’s a concerted effort (actually, rather a distributed effort) of every clown with a chip on his shoulder to frame some debate as Either my way or the apocalypse.
There was a report from NZ saying just that. The person writing the article had spoken to a member of the “elite” who revealed to them that the plan was for the population of the west to overthrow their governments once they realised what had been done to them. Then one world government would take over.
Sorry link lost.
I can’t actually see riots or wars speeding up moves towards world government. It’s during the relative peace of the past 30 years that it’s made particularly rapid progress. See the 2018 book ‘Giants: the Global Power Elite’ by Prof. Peter Phillips.
I also highly recommend James Kunstler’s 2020 book ‘Living in the Long Emergency’. It’s the sequel to his 2005 book ‘The Long Emergency’. It went to press late 2019 so by coincidence it excludes COVID. This is useful, because you can see how the world post-peak oil faced enormous financial / economic problems and how COVID fitted in as a convenient story. to hide what was really being done, i.e. organising a reset of the currency.
I can’t see them doing that, isn’t it more likely they want digital control so we can’t overthrow them.
I don’t know, the globalists don’t want national governments. A tsunami of litigation and near-civil war could easily lead to outside (globalist UN) intervention being ‘needed’.
If 5 million people march on Westminster with the sole intention of murdering 500 MPs, digital control won’t stop them.
It’s nothing to do with China. The rich of the West have their money invested safely all over the place, far away from ‘Western’ nations. They buy land in South America, the Caribbean, Europe (if they are American). They will have their futures safeguarded even if there is war and revolution in the lower 48. They’ve never been patriots, they just use patriotism to keep the people dupable. The European ‘elites’ are just the same.
We need our MPs to make EUAs illegal.
Giving pharmaceutical companies immunity from prosecution during a rushed rollout of novel drugs should have been a red flag to anyone – certainly to our MPs.
Only if they had a modicum of integrity and intellect.
Sadly, they have neither.
Democracy red in tooth and claw. Lol.
Especially when there’s fraud!
It has all the hallmarks of a conspiracy against public health!
The. Ministry of Truth deals in propaganda.
The Ministry of Love deals in torture.
The Ministry of Plenty deals in shortages.
The Ministry of Public Health deals in…
The Ministry of Public Health deals in unprotected sex with syphilis sufferers….
I’ve been meaning to post this for a while; an interview with the US’s most cancelled man:
Exclusive Interview: Robert Kennedy Jr. Destroys Big Pharma, Fauci & Pro-Vaccine Movement — Yandex video search
Actually, EUAs used properly are an essential part of a proper response to disease crises. The problem is not an EUA per se, it is the entirely corrupt, dysfunctional, criminal classes in the pharmaceutical industry, in the money world, in Westminster and the media that makes it problematic.
But let’s be clear: if I had been PM, with a PhD and seven years virological postdoctoral experience, allied to working in the commerical biopharma space for a while, had prevented EUAs for Covid vaccines, if I had allowed controlled trialling of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, budesonide etc etc, you can be sure that I would have been bumped off by Gates et al.
What we need is to kick Gates, Soros and all their organisations out of the UK, out of Europe, out of everywhere. We need to withdraw all recognition of the WHO so long as Gates is an investor. We will not allow Gates to have any contact with the Department of Health, nor will he have any influence on UK health policy. Cambridge University and all other UK universities will be told that accepting Gates money is incompatible with receiving a single penny of UK public money and that the Gates Scholarship programme must be thrown out due to the evil of its benefactor.
Pfizer’s exclusivity deal with Israel probably doesn’t seem like such great idea to their shareholders after all in hindsight. But thank you, Pfizer, for allowing us to pinpoint exactly how much harm YOUR product caused in YOUR own ‘personal lab.’
What’s important is we realise the Everdemic is not over, never will be, and we should get our fourth dose – and schedule the fifth – and particularly get the young doses up as it’s the best way to protect them.
On what scientific basis can you say that.
I’m hoping that this is sarcasm.
If I were working in the Cabinet Office I would be writing:
“Nothing to see here – move along. Oh. look! There’s a squirrel…”
and then going out to buy booze for the next party…
That is exactly what the Government , the Judiciary, the MHRA , 80 % of MPs and the Police have been doinhg for two years – isn’t this just a bit suspicious?
If you were working in the Cabinet office, you would have to put up with Mark Sedwill coming to poke his oar in, thinking that the current incumbent must fall into line with his MI6 and Goldman Sachs schemata…
just reading about Troponins. A way to test for heart stress. Apparently jabs increased levels by insane multiples. Just to put it into context, a normal level of troponin in the body is <0.05. 1-4 is heart attack risk. Jab takes level to 35
The law of unintended (or intended) consequences!
I remember Hugh Pym (PPE Oxford), the BBC’s ‘health editor’ saying on the today programme after Novak Djokovic’s interview, “What more evidence does he want?”. Perhaps, Hugh should be sent this and asked to reconsider his question.
What more evidence do we want to demand that Hugh Pym be sacked without a reference?
Next door neighbour. Found dead from heart attack a week back. 60ish, a bit overweight but normal for his age.
Husband of Covidian acquiantance. Died in his sleep. Heart attack. c45, a bit overweight but normal for his age.
One of my best friends. c 45. Pericarditis after being boosted. In hospital for a week. Better now.
Many people (most) rationalise these events as things that ‘just happens to men of a certain age’. What they are overlooking is that these are sufficiently rare such that if a factor comes along that causes more of these events, then the likelihood that it was the cause is very high. So yes, I’m happy saying that it was the vaxx that did it (most likely).
Out of the blue today my daughter said something along the lines of ‘I want to go and get my vaccine in ABC town. Becky at school said that they give out biscuits once you’ve had it’. This was only about 15 minutes after I found out about one of these events so I almost blew my top.
I don’t think overweight people do get more heart attacks. Dr Malcolm Kendrick has looked into this. There’s a phenomenan called the obesity paradox. People who are naturally thin can also suffer diabetes and cardiovascular problems.
You get tea and biscuits after you donate blood. That’s a more socially useful activity.
Shops also SELL biscuits.
The cardio vascular damage of a single packet of high fructose biscuits will be less than a jab though.
https://realclimatescience.com/2022/04/twitter-doubling-down-on-their-evil/
See what happens when you put things like this on twitter
I just had to visit an acquaintance of a friend, to collect something he had spare and was giving away. The first thing he said as I entered the house was: ‘You’re OK, we’re all vaccinated’. I said something to the effect that I couldn’t care less about COVID. My only worry was his two large dogs which were jumping madly up and down.
He gradually got the message that I wasn’t that keen on dogs but seemed to think I was
1 irrational to be worried about dogs almost the size of a human
2 irrational not to be worried about COVID.
Had the dogs been vaccinated though?
Did anyone notice when they mentioned Hancock flooding care homes with asymptomatic patents they are perpetuating the asymptomatic myth.
Has it turned out to be a myth? Have you got a good link for that, please?
You don’t need a link. You know it. Can you give someone a cold when you don’t have a cold?
In Lala Covid Lieland anything is possible – except the vax protecting you from the virus.
It has never been demonstrated to exist since Whitty invented it . Or do you have evidence to the contrary?
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/a-few-new-papers-are-brewing?s=r
Jessica Rose on the sudden death category in VAERS.
Safe to say, sudden death is happening and being reported at rates higher than ever before (big surprise) as per VAERS, and although it is being reported for individuals ages 50+ with more prevalence, it is not limited to a specific age group.
Check out the graph for the percentage of cases of sudden death by the days post vaccine. phew!
“Killer Jab”? Exactly how much more evidence is needed?
Front page news? BBC lead story ? No …pushed aside .
Evil stalks the Land of Lies !
its Also very weird how hepatitis is mysteriously on the rise among youngsters.
Israel should remember that that one resurrection on their turf has an asterisk beside it.
So there were fifty excess deaths in 3 months in a population of 3-4 million (depending how the demographics of a population of 8.9m people works out)?
It does seem a bit of a waste of money to spend multiple millions vaccinating a healthy population just to kill 50 of them. It’s no good health-wise and pretty useless as a eugenics exercise too!
Why not just spend the money handing out free condoms instead?!
It’s where the money goes that’s the point. Pfizer etc
Oh it is much worse than this. Simply read the 1,250,000 adverse event reports in the USA and 22,000 deaths post vaxx cdc VAERS reports. Adverse events range from transverse myelitis, thrombocytopenia, strokes, atrial fibrillation,heart attacks, Bell’s palsy, guillian barre, reactivation of dormant viruses such as shingles, serious lung infections, blindness, tinnitus, serious skin eruptions, miscarriages, abnormal menstrual bleeding, reoccurrence of cancers, including pancreatic, ovarian, lung, breast, unsteadiness, vertigo and many more. Did you know Pfizer just released in their data dump, six pages of adverse events from their trial data. More people died in the trial arm than the control group. If you took these vaccines, you should be concerned.