Official information is hard to come by

The watcher watches the watcher

If you approach the Ombudsman's office about an ignored request for official information, you will be told to go back to the Ministry from whom you originally sought the information. 

If you do that and still get no response, the next step is to lodge a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman. 

If, in turn, you get no response from the Office of the Ombudsman, you have only one option: you can lodge a complaint about your complaint, with the Office of the Ombudsman (by email only).

In Dr Seuss lingo, the watcher watches the watcher. 

The questions in this case 610154 are pretty simple but important, involving outcomes that could give the unelected World Health Organisation and its Switzerland based Director General far reaching powers over the citizens of New Zealand.

Questions asked were:

Who represented New Zealand at the World Health Assembly gathering in Switzerland?

What were their roles?

Did they have speaking and voting rights?

Who appointed these delegates?

Who is charged with voting for New Zealand, as a World Health Organisation member state?

Have the issues raised at the Assembly been discussed in Parliament?

Further, Peter Abernethy at the Ministry of Health was asked if his department would be preparing a media statement to explain the issues and the procedure. 

“Please supply all reports, emails and memos to and from the New Zealand’s delegates at the Assembly, to and from government agencies and politicians relating to the Assembly.”

Clearly the delegates representing us in Switzerland have a huge task and a massive responsibility. They are expected to stand up and be counted.

This is the case 610154 timeline:

• May 23: Request for information sent to the Ministry of Health about New Zealand’s involvement at the World Health Assembly in Geneva.

Silence

• June 1: Request sent to the Office of the Ombudsman as no information was supplied by the ministry: “Please supply the following information under the [Official Information Act (OIA) / Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA)]”

• July 21: Complaint lodged about the Ministry of Health’s lack of reply to a repeated request for information relating to New Zealand’s appearance at the World Health Assembly gathering in Switzerland.

• August 30: Office of the Ombudsman - ref: 610154: “Your complaint is currently awaiting allocation to a dedicated investigator. It will be allocated as soon as possible and, once allocated, the assigned Investigator will contact you directly to discuss next steps.”

Silence.

• September 21:  A phone call to the Office of the Ombudsman, asking for an update.

Silence.

• October 3: Phone call to the Office of the Ombudsman. The case has been reallocated to an assistant investigator…. “Thank you for your continued patience as this matter progresses.”

We’re talking about four months of patience. A decision on a request for information under the Act, should be made within 20 working days of receiving that request.

The case was initially allocated to a ‘dedicated investigator’.  It has now been allocated to an ‘assistant investigator’.

So we have slipped down the ladder a rung.

Generously, we can assume that this inability to answer simple but important questions relating to WHO’s global health agenda, and our involvement, is due to incompetence or staff shortages.

If there is a more sinister reason for the evasion, we should be excused for fearing that duplicity, secrecy and maniacal determination is part of a great greedy globalist power snatch, facilitated by our government.

The WHO sees itself as playing a ‘directing role’ on the world stage. Health governance is its ‘a strategic priority’. 

It outlined its objectives in a report by its Director General ten years ago. 

Things are now coming to a head as WHO bureaucrats develop international health regulations and a global pandemic preparedness treaty.

Who knows if we are present and being counted?