Tip - If you are using a phone, set the "Desktop Site" option in your browser   

2022-12-15

"The WHO and its expert panels have applied an all-encompassing approach in the design of this Pandemic Treaty; but in doing so, it is arguable they have created a scope of action that has no discernible boundaries"

"The WHO struggles to retain impartiality, as described by the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly: Experts with conflicts of interest, particularly commercial interests, can influence its opinions and policy. Historically, this has resulted in a huge waste of public money"

"In the U.K., we face the prospect of the WHO being able to police debate and influence policies in areas far removed from conventional definitions of health or health-related sectors"

"The risk of blanket censorship is immense, and the likelihood is that censorship would be used as a lever to misappropriate public funds under the guise of safety"

" ... in the U.K. treaties are subject to a negative resolution procedure, meaning that this instrument could be ratified with no parliamentary debate or vote"

"U.K. parliaments must act now to ensure adequate mechanisms are in place, allowing effective scrutiny and comprehension of this treaty"

" ... the idea that we should handover powers on this and give coercive powers of compulsion to an unelected, unaccountable international technocracy or bureaucracy, requires much more of a fundamental debate and we are rushing to adopt a treaty with barely any public debate – I find that just astonishing"

Wait - what is there to debate?

Do we want to be governed by the WEF-WHO-UN or do we wish to remain an independent nation?

This doesn't require endless debate, it requires immediate refutation.

Welcome to the New World Order.