Britain is refusing to sign the World Health Organisation’s pandemic treaty while it insists the U.K. would have to give away a fifth of its jabs, the Telegraph reports.
The U.K. is firmly against such vaccine-related commitments and will not sign any form of the pandemic agreement that undermines Britain’s sovereignty.
Representatives of the WHO’s 194 member states are halfway through talks to try to agree to the WHO Pandemic Agreement, an initiative first announced in May 2021.
At the peak of the Covid emergency, nations planned to sign a legally binding document, informally known as the pandemic treaty, or pandemic accord, that would force countries to tackle the next global health emergency in a united way.
Under the terms of the latest draft of the treaty, now in its ninth and final iteration, all member states, including the U.K., would be obliged to give up 20% of “pandemic-related health products” to other countries and would be prevented from stockpiling supplies. This would include therapeutics, PPE and vaccines.
The WHO document states the UN-run agency would get “real-time access” to 10% of these products for free, and 10% “at affordable prices”.
The divisive document says countries should “set aside a portion of its total procurement of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccines in a timely manner for use in countries facing challenges… and avoid having national stockpiles of pandemic-related health products”.
A source familiar with the negotiations said: “The U.K. could not accept these proposals in their current form – and they have not been agreed.”
It is understood the U.K. will only agree to a legally binding global accord if there is a commitment that British-made jabs are used for what the U.K. deems to be its own national interest.
Officials are understood to want to remain in control of being able to choose when it is best for the U.K. to distribute products globally and when resources will be best deployed domestically.
It is understood that while the U.K. is keen to work towards a united approach, it is not prepared to give up autonomy on its own assets.
Worth reading in full.
Of all the problems with the loss of sovereignty during (WHO-declared) ‘public health emergencies’ entailed by the current treaty proposals, having to give away some of our vaccines and medicines to poor countries is hardly top of the list. How about not being railroaded into lockdowns and travel restrictions? But it seems that vaccines are all our Government seems to care about now.
Stop Press: Dr. Meryl Nass reports that 22 Attorneys-General in the U.S. have told Joe Biden that the WHO will not be making public policy in their states.
Stop Press 2: Ross Clark in the Spectator says Britain is right to stand up against the WHO’s power grab.
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.
It could never really happen anyway. If such a treaty were to be accepted it would be an implicit destruction of any country’s sovereignty and thus and ruling power structure would immeditely become defunct. All of the power players know this. They just feed you this to give you the impression that you’re still in Kansas. We were very lucky to be exposed to the film The Wizard Of Oz because it contains several hints and warnings and they have become subsumed into our psyche.
That’s why I’m amazed sunak hasn’t signed it. Yet..
The Jabs are dangerous ! Hopefully they will soon be like trying to sell a car with square wheels ( mind you if it was classed as Eco friendly some muppets would buy them
)
So I imagine the WHO might just tweak that little part of the treaty, and let countries hold on to all their domestically produced jabs. So now the deal becomes: We, the WHO, will repeal the sovereignty of all signatory states during times of pandemic, “potential” pandemic or “potential” global health alert, deny the autonomy and freedom of their citizens and halt all democratic processes as we know them – and that is all fine because we’ve taken away the clause that requires the governments of such states to poison citizens of other countries as well as just their own.
What? Won’t sign because
our sovereignty would be given away? No, because the poison death and injury shots would be given away. Unbelievable. Clown World.Absolutely correct not to sign it. We should only think about compliance in the event that we’re mandated to hand over the lot, 100%. Having ‘got rid,’ we should then refuse to sign in any circumstances.
The real rulers know that we are heading for cataclysm or reset. The game is to keep the charade going on long enough to maximise their gains. Part of that is having a much reduced population after the catclysm. If you look at events from the perspective of a coming catastrophe then they start to make more sense.
That is ‘their’ hill to die on!
Look at investments in areas that are currently desert they know that things are shifting. In Russia the pole shift is common knowledge. They are already building a trade route in the Arctic with China which will bypass Anglo-American channels. To begin with it will be with high tech icebreakers but they know that the far north is going to thaw very soon. Similarly the Brits know the fate of this country in terms of climate – significantly worse. It makes a big difference if you are armed with this knowledge. How many people actually think about their people or brethren.
I fear that this is just part of the scam.
UK Gov: Look! We’re being all tough about this, Protecting our sovereignty. Not putting up with any bullshit.
WHO: OK. You don’t have to do that bit about sharing stuff. You just have to do lockdowns and masks and stuff and closing schools and doing tests and surveillance when we say so.
UK Gov: Great! (Trebles all round! See, we aren’t pushovers. We were really tough with them!)
Once again, currently-sovereign nation states are shying away from the risk of becoming outliers assuming the the WHO is going to form a kind of “club of nations” (much like the UN), this time comprised of the signatories to the Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the IHR. Much as local populations of potential member states have absolutely no desire to be part of such a “club”, the governments of those member states probably feel themselves pressured into joining so as to avoid the the vilification and isolation from the rest of the world that they fear might result from the abstention from signing. All of this is completely unfounded, of course, as people hold national and individual sovereignty to be of greater importance than their representatives in government do. So any state that boldly refuses the coercive offer to serve under a “pandemic dictatorship” will earn the respect of the world as one who stood up for the sovereignty of the nation and its people.
Given the regard that the recent vaccines are held in by many, it seems to me that giving 100% of them to the WHO would be ideal provided that Tedros, Gates and their cronies are required to be injected with all of the doses.
Jacob Rees Mogg pushing the establishment line with no counter argument. Where is oFcom! Only joking, would not want to entertain that state censor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Hmz9-Ok34
Yes I guess the UK thinks it is absolutely fine to give away its sovereignity to the WHO, but dear Lord don’t take away are unsafe and ineffective vaxxes
. This country, this government has its priorities mixed up.
‘has its priorities mixed up’
That’s too kind, too gentle a way of describing the government – not the country, by the way: the government of whatever tint is not the country, nor does the government represent the views of the vast majority of people – far from it. We don’t live in a real democracy, for heaven’s sake!
The Uniparty government represents only its own views. An elite cabal of liblabcon has been managing this country for 100 years and mismanaging it appallingly since the end of WW2.
It doesn’t matter if it’s the cons or the labs who sit on the front benches or the opposition benches; they take turn and turnabout again and again (only fair!) with the limp dims occasionally allowed to snuggle up to whichever faction needs propping up after a doubtful ‘election’ result.
There are alternative ways of viewing the bubble-dwellers who have a stranglehold on this country’s politics: they are either incompetent morons or they are cowardly traitors to every British man, woman and child.
Only incompetent morons would even think of signing up to China’s lickspittle Tawdry Tedros’s Treaty and the WHO’s blatant attempt at a power grab to further the ends of the globalist malefactors.
Only cowardly traitors intent on selling us all down the river for personal gain and approval from their masters would sign up to the Treaty of aforesaid globalist malefactors who care nothing for nations, national sovereignty, and the native people’s rights to freedom, independence and self-rule in their own land.
‘Mixed-up priorities’ don’t come into it. The Uniparty Undemocrats who misgovern our country are either unfit for purpose or they are treacherous scoundrels.
This is Sunak electioneering, trying to look tough, standing up for British sovereignty. Two years earlier and he’d have signed it. Had the election been last month, he’d now be signing it
Starmer will be signing it soon after the next election, if Sunak hasn’t signed it by then.
To my mind, the biggest threat facing humanity is the political class, on a par with the super-rich.