The World Health Organisation (WHO) wants to increase its global influence through a pandemic treaty and proposed amendments to existing International Health Regulations.
Before Aotearoa/New Zealand proceeds with either, questions need to be asked and there should be an open discussion.
Dear Prime Minister Chris Hipkins
The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently developing two international legal tools intended to expand its authority in managing international health emergencies.
Amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), and
A pandemic treaty.
Please discuss both these initiatives, and New Zealand’s involvement, with the general public.
March 11 marks three years since the WHO declared COVID a pandemic.
The WHO is an unelected global health organisation whose advice our health authorities followed during the pandemic. It is now increasingly clear that mistakes were made and it may well be that New Zealanders have no appetite for new dictates from the WHO.
The WHO’s recently released draft of the pandemic treaty proposes to expand its surveillance powers and give it a range of control activities in the case of perceived public health threats. The draft can be viewed here.
While the WHO’s COVID policies failed to achieve their promised objectives, it continues to push flawed advice and shows no sign of admitting errors of judgement.
We have learned
that the COVID-19 vaccine does not prevent infection, replication, transmission or disease while safety risks are becoming clearer
the decision not to recognise natural immunity was wrong
school closures and masking did more harm than good
quarantine measures were brutal
The impact of the mandates is ongoing. Some 40 percent of New Zealand’s workforce faced an ultimatum requiring them to submit to a medical intervention or lose their job. Incomes were lost, families were split and the country became divided.
Injecting children was unnecessary and risky.
Forbidding early treatment with repurposed drugs was illogical.
Censorship, demonising, deplatforming, cancellation and slandering of those who questioned the official response was undemocratic.
Epidemiologist and bio-statistician Dr Martin Kulldorff said in an interview, “During the last few years, we have seen the worst public health mistakes in history.” There is a long list of eminent doctors and scientists, around the world, who are now vocally opposed to the WHO-driven pandemic response.
Politically it has become a hot potato too. In a speech to the European Parliament, member Cristian Terhes said recently,“You are witnessing right now the biggest corruption cover-up in the history of the European Union”.
Overseas COVID lawsuits are expected to be ‘bigger than asbestos and big tobacco’, according to organisers of The Covid Litigation Conference held in Atlanta, USA on March 25,26. The conference focuses on employer and education mandates, medical licence, fraud, civil rights, censorship, vaccine injury and hospital negligence.
This is surely not the time to give the WHO more powers.
It is feared that, if these accords are finalised, the WHO will be able to make rules for everybody, with powers to:
Define the next pandemic
Determine lockdowns
Conduct surveillance
Determine treatments
Require vaccine mandates
Control intellectual property
During the COVID pandemic the WHO handed out advice to heads of government including former PM Jacinda Ardern. You, PM Chris Hipkins, and former Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield helped promote and implement their regulations, undoubtedly with good intentions.
New Zealand is now deeply involved in the WHO agenda.
New Zealand is among 16 countries who made submissions to the amendments.
Dr Ashley Bloomfield (remembered for his non-negotiable refusal of vaccine exemptions), is now Co-Chair of the WHO’s International Health Regulations Working Group. The group meets for in-depth negotiations from April 17 to 20.
Andrew Forsyth - the NZ Ministry of Health’s manager of Public Health Strategy - is a member of the WHO’s IHR Review Committee.
The WHO plans to present its proposed treaty to the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of the WHO, in May and finalise the treaty by May 2024.
There has been little coverage in mainstream media about the treaty or the proposed health regulations.
Please answer the following questions that require public discussion:
Is Aotearoa/NZ committed to the proposed pandemic treaty and the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005)?
Will NZ citizens be given a voice prior to the country becoming a signatory to the treaty and/or government endorsement?
Unlike New Zealand lawmaking, where elected representatives vote on laws, the WHO lawmaking process involves mostly unelected diplomats voting on the treaty. What is the process relating to NZ’s commitment to the treaty and health regulations. Is legislation required?
Would you and your cabinet consider a referendum to gauge public opinion?
The WHO’s momentum is described as a self-perpetuating pandemic industry, with major internal conflicts of interest, funded by the world’s taxpayers. What checks and balances are needed?
Under the proposed regulations, will doctors be told what they may prescribe and what they will be prohibited from giving a patient when the WHO declares a public health emergency?
Will the treaty/accord provisions interfere with our national sovereignty in the case of declaring and managing a health emergency?
Can New Zealand opt out in order to preserve its sovereignty and protect individual human rights of its citizens?
While the International Health Regulations make up a legally binding agreement, will the WHO gain control over national health policy, and enforcement mechanisms?
The WHO relies heavily on private donors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Do you think there should be limits on private funding to the WHO? (The BIll and Melinda Gates Foundation is already drumming up fear about the next pandemic.)
In conclusion, there is little trust in the WHO as it continues to trot out its outdated and flawed message, as follows: “Experiencing side effects after getting vaccinated means the vaccine is working and your immune system is responding as it should. Vaccines are safe, and getting vaccinated will help protect you against COVID-19.”
You and your government are asked for public dialogue to back up any action concerning the WHO and its ambitious global agenda.
With thanks for your attention,
Keri Molloy
Independent journalist
Note to readers: A petition requesting that the House of Representatives call for a Royal Commission of Inquiry in the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccine use in New Zealand closes at the end of March. Petition
.
Sources
International context – the International Health Regulations | Ministry of Health NZ
Cristian Terhes Member of the European Parliament tweeted this month
COVID-19 vaccines – An Australian Review | Journal of Clinical & Experimental Immunology1
https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/exercises/2022-catastrophic-contagion/videos.htm
Masking Schoolchildren is Institutional Child Abuse | The BMJ
World-Renowned Doctors Wreak Havoc on COVID Narrative in Major Roundtable Discussion - DailyClout