Will the UK Government give the WHO (World health organisation) the power over health in our country? It seems likely when you dig deeper in to what is going on.
Opinion:
It is our UK Parliament who should decide whether to lock us all down . Our politicians should not enter in to binding agreements which allows a global "one size fits all" organisation like the WHO to issue mandatory health edicts which might lock us down.
 |
Background to WHO.
With the ending of World War 2 in 1945, countries wanted peace and so they formed the United Nations. From that came the World Health Organisation (WHO) which was formed in 1948. The UK is one of 194 countries that are members of the World Health Organisation. This is how the WHO describes what it does today:
"WHO leads global efforts to expand universal health coverage. We direct and coordinate the world’s response to health emergencies. And we promote healthier lives – from pregnancy care through old age. Our Triple Billion targets outline an ambitious plan for the world to achieve good health for all using science-based policies and programmes."
Situation in the UK
All health authorities in the UK send relevant material to UK Health Security Agency (formerly known as Public Health England). UKHSA are then the single point of contact that talks to the WHO. Scroll down a bit on this Gov.uk page to see this under the title "Details" .
UK and all other member states of the WHO are signed up to the International Health Regulations 2005 (IHR2005). This is a legally binding international instrument (a sort of international peace agreement about health). The purpose of IHR2005 is to provide a public health response for when diseases start to spread across the planet.
What are the concerns regarding IHR2005?
UK is already signed up to 5 new articles of the IHR that were ADOPTED by the 75th World Health Assembly on 27 May 2022.
The amendments that were adopted on 27 May 2022 have not been debated in or voted on by Parliament. The UK has the authority to reject them under Article 61 of the IHR, but any such rejection must be within 18 months of their adoption (ie by November 2024).
The effect of these amendments seems to make pandemic measures from the WHO binding (mandatory) on the member states. It seems to want the distribution of resources (eg vaccines) to be a matter for the WHO to decide based on need around the planet. As with many such ideas these days , it sounds fair and virtuous. But in fact it might not be very efficient , and might produce many unintended consequences that don't produce best outcomes for anyone, especially in UK and Europe.
Parliament must be given the opportunity to vote on whether to reject the amendments that have already been adopted, and also the 307 proposed amendments that are currently being negotiated by the UK delegates to the 76th World Health Assembly. The UK has not proposed any of the 307 amendments.
Here is the petition which you are invited to sign. It asks for UK Parliament to discuss and vote on those ammendments to IHR2005.
 |
| Please sign petition to allow a vote |
Negotiations on the draft pandemic accord will aim to produce a final draft for consideration in 2024.