Name
Address incl Post Code

Dear MP,

I am writing to ask you to oppose the amendments to the International Health regulations (2005) that are currently being negotiated and are due be adopted by May 2024, but may be adopted as early as May 2023.

These amendments are being drafted at the same time as the WHO Pandemic Accord, but are distinct and not to be confused. The IHR amendments are far more serious.

The IHR amendments contain a number of very concerning changes to the WHO’s role, not least that recommendations made by the WHO will become ‘binding’ on member states.

The implications of these amendments, as drafted, are enormous for the UK as a sovereign nation and will affect the lives of every single person living in this country. 

Why are these amendments not being debated in Parliament?

Here is a summary of what is being proposed:

• Expand the definitions of pandemics & health emergencies, including the introduction of ‘potential’ emergencies rather than actual emergencies. It also expands the definition of health products that fall under this to include any commodity or process that may impact on the response or “improve quality of life.”

• Change the recommendations of the IHR from ‘non-binding’ to mandatory instructions that the States must follow and implement.

• Solidify the unelected WHO Director General’s ability to independently declare emergencies, thereby enabling a de facto global dictatorship.

• Set up an extensive surveillance process in all States, which WHO will verify regularly through a county review mechanism.

• Enable WHO to access and share country and individual data without consent.

• Give WHO control over certain country resources, including requirements for mandatory financial contributions, and provision of intellectual property and know-how (within the broad definition of health products above).

• Ensure national support for censorship activities by WHO to prevent alternative approaches and concerns from being freely discussed and disseminated.

• Change existing IHR provisions affecting individuals from non-binding to binding, including border closures, travel restrictions, confinement (quarantine), medical examinations and medication of individuals. The latter would encompass requirements for injection with vaccines or other pharmaceuticals.

• The amendments also include the removal of ‘the need to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons’.

• Give WHO control over the safety standards that will apply to pharmaceutical and other public health interventions.

The huge implications of these changes will mean that the UK Parliament cannot over ride ‘binding’ diktats coming from the WHO, in the event of an actual (or potential) public health crisis. 

In addition, one man alone, the Director General of the WHO, can decide to declare a global pandemic or other emergency with no evidence whatsoever and no checks and balances on that decision will exist. 

In this scenario, the WHO will then be able to impose all manner of restrictions on the lives of everyday citizens of this country without regard to an individual’s human rights.

An international bureaucracy is currently being built with funding envisioned at up to $31 billion per year, including $10 billion in new funding. (For context, the entire current WHO annual budget is about $3.6 billion). This same bureaucracy will surveil for new and variant viruses, identify them, determine their ‘threat’ and then implement a response. This is essentially creating a self-perpetuating pandemic industry, with major internal conflicts of interest, funded by the world’s taxpayers but, being under a UN agency, having no national legal oversight and little accountability. Its justification for continued funding will rely on declaring and responding to perceived threats, restricting the lives of others whilst accruing profit to its sponsors through pharmaceutical recommendations and mandates.

Can you assure me that the UK Government will not support a handing over of UK sovereignty to the unelected WHO through these amendments to the International Health Regulations?

The UK and other governments currently have until November 2023 to reject what may be deemed ‘minor’ amendments that were made to the IHR behind closed doors last May. These amendments went through without a vote or signature. Of significance was an amendment that has reduced the time for countries to implement the further proposed IHR amendments from 24 months to 12 months. i.e. should amendments be adopted in May 2023, countries would have 12 months to implement WHO mandates or be held legally accountable by this or a new central governing body.

I look forward to your urgent response.

Kind regards,

Name
Address with Post Code