New international ‘legal instrument’ looms.
The Australian government has released a consultation paper detailing their adherence to a “global accord” on “pandemic prevention, preparedness and response” moving forward.
As was the concern, this will come in the form of negotiating an international agreement to ‘protect nations and communities from future pandemic emergencies’.
To date, member states of the World Health Organization (WHO), including Australia, have met to discuss priorities for a draft a ‘pandemic instrument’ and changes to International Health Regulations (IHR).
The government has now detailed these ‘two important processes’ being worked on to ‘strengthen the international community’ in their paper, as a means to ‘prevent, prepare for and respond to, pandemics’.
The implementation of a ‘pandemic treaty’ that would make any future ‘pandemic’ responses faster and more efficient, allowing for a ‘seamless’ centralised international process.
The Australian government says in the paper that ‘our priorities have been informed by lessons learned from our national response to the COVID-19 pandemic’, as well as ‘through consultation within cabinet and targeted consultation with interest groups’.
“Targeted consultation” sounds lovely, doesn’t it?
What are the odds that the two departments caught lying about ‘misinformation’ are leading the charge?
So, what is the timeline they are hoping to achieve this by?
The consultation paper says member states have agreed to establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) to draft and negotiate the instrument for consideration at the 77th WHA in May 2024.
The INB will comprise all 194 WHO member states, including Australia, as well as “invited stakeholders” and international organisations.
The pandemic instrument is “…intended to strengthen international cooperation in order to reduce the risk and impact of international health threats, such as that posed by the COVID-19 pandemic”.
Yes, this is serious business, folks.
Australia is currently discussing with our ‘partners’ at home on the best ‘advice’, before ‘representatives’ head off to be apart of an Orwellian “intergovernmental negotiating body” that will control all health responses. In other words, once formed, national sovereignty over these decisions will be removed.
Essentially, the same circus ‘majority’ show we see in our own Parliaments will soon apply to the negotiation of an international health treaty. Labor and the Greens recently used their rule to squash a pandemic royal commission, and as such, any rational nations will be also be squashed at WHO as well.
It’s just how the numbers will work.
The dominant gang of member states (we don’t get to vote for) will rule, and once they ‘decide’ on the final terms of the ‘instrument’, it will become legally binding and transferred to our own law structures.
The forming of world government without the need to make it a single government on the surface.
Like the UN, they can deflect finger pointing by saying it is a ‘negotiation’ process with ‘everyone involved’.
But what happens when only the dominant voices are heard? (Sold off nations like ours).
And, guess what?
They are looking to hear for YOUR feedback before they do so!
“As we move forward in the negotiation processes, we are seeking the views of Australian stakeholders and the community through this online survey on what you want to see in a new pandemic instrument and amended IHR. Your views will help inform Australia’s engagement in negotiations.”
The government says they are ‘seeking your views’ on the following questions:
- How can international cooperation be improved to more effectively prevent, prepare for, and respond to, future pandemics and other international health emergencies?
- What issues do you think need to be prioritised to guide the world’s future preparation for, and responses to, future pandemics and other international health emergencies?
- Is there any other information you would like to provide that might help to guide Australia’s engagement on a new international pandemic instrument and changes to the IHR?
That’s right, you can have your say until September 17th (it isn’t a big window, probably by design).
Let your thoughts on this paper and their plans be heard before we enter a ‘new world’ of international health management. One that Australia has wholeheartedly supported since the ‘pandemic’.
THE PATH HERE
The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response was first set up by WHO in response to a request from the World Health Assembly (WHA).
This was to “provide an evidence-based path for the future, grounded in lessons of the present and the past, to ensure countries and global institutions, including specifically WHO, effectively address health threats.”
The panel based its work on “insights and lessons learned from the health response to COVID-19 as coordinated by WHO”, much like Australia is doing now.
They examined why COVID-19 became a world health and socio-economic crisis (ironically) and published its findings in a report in May 2021. The report identified “a need for stronger leadership and coordination at national, regional and international levels to prevent and respond to pandemics”.
It recommended the development of a new ‘pandemic instrument’ to address “gaps in the international response”, to “clarify responsibilities between states and international organisations”, and to “establish and reinforce legal obligations and norms”.
In December 2021, at a Special Session of the WHA, WHO member states, including Australia, agreed to commence negotiations on a new international instrument for pandemic prevention.
In March 2023, Tedros applauded the decision by WHO member states to draft a pandemic treaty, “so the world will never again have to face the devastation of a pandemic like COVID-19”.
Tedros also called for updated negotiations on the International Health Regulations document, a treaty formed in 2005 outlining preparedness and responses to health crises.
Now, we can see that both of these ideas are being followed through with here in Australia.
Both sides of government have pushed this since the ‘pandemic’ period itself.
In 2021, both sides of Australia’s false blue-red paradigm committed to sign any future pandemic treaties that would arise, and also state their intentions to do so on official government website pages.
Any finalised treaty is likely to include the condition that UN WHO ‘health troops’ would be able to be quickly deployed to any nation with an outbreak to ‘assist preparedness responses’.
Bill Gates, for example, proposed last year setting up “pandemic prevention team” called ’Global Epidemic Response and Mobilization’, or GERM, for short.
Teams like this would be able to be deployed to the ground to control and manage our entire response, matching the efforts of other coordinated deployments.. all controlled by WHO.
Perhaps the COVID-19 ‘pandemic’ was just a test run of things to come in the future.