An open letter to my Federal representative
A couple of months ago, I wrote to my local Federal Parliamentary representative on the issue of proposed amendments to International Health Regulations (2005). I believe these amendments are an attempt to strip us of our individual rights. They are designed to rob us of national sovereignty and hand control of national health policy to unelected technocrats housed within international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO), the United Nations (UN) and even the World Economic Forum (WEF).
Over the past couple of years. I have written to Susan Templeman, the member for Macquarie, regularly to raise my concerns over what I perceived as the dangers of allowing large pharmaceutical interests and their local servants to guide Australia’s approach to Covid-19 pandemic management. Though out of government for the first two years of the Covid crisis, her party preferred to seek political advantage rather than challenge or question state and national policies that were chaotic at best.
Her party, the Australian Labor Party, called for more rigorous implementation of these failed policies such as perennial vaxxing, even harsher lockdowns and ubiquitous masking. They even made these demands centrepieces of their election campaigns at the Federal, State and local levels. Unsurprisingly, my challenges received the usual “I trust the science” pat response
Are you a good person?
I am concerned now that further looming encroachments, even attacks, on human rights will meet the same supine compliance or neglect. This is coupled with cynical appeals being made to our sense of social responsibility, as were clearly employed during an extraordinary campaign to have us injected with untested, experimental mRNA injections. Are you a good person? The same social engineering is being used to pressure us into acceptance of potentially calamitous proposed options in addressing climate change, transgenderism and more recently the Voice,
I am writing this open letter to encourage others to join me in challenging their local politicians. I also welcome any suggestions or observations.
Attention: Susan Templeman, Member for Macquarie, New South Wales
Thank you reply for your reply, on 9th February 2023, to my original correspondence on 7th February of that month.
This correspondence raised a number of concerns for me. Firstly, you point to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT). This is a common area of confusion. My correspondence referred to the International Health Regulations (2005) Amendments. I am not referring to the Treaty which appears to be running in parallel to the amendments push and is causing a lot of confusion. It is not clear that JSCOT will have jurisdiction or veto power over these amendments. These are not merely of concern to Australians but are causing consternation across the world.
These concerns and dangers to national sovereignty are expressed eloquently and recently by Mr Danny Kruger, Member of Parliament for Devizes in Wiltshire, UK. How remarkably polite the English are.
There is also a precedent for my reasonable concerns regarding the potential disregard of national sovereignty and unilateral overreach by the WHO. On 27th May 2022, amendments were passed by 194 unelected members of the World Health Assembly using the “silence procedure”.
Along with the matters raised by Mr Kruger, I have very real concerns that the public interest will be bypassed in the approval of these amendments. A full discussion of what happened in May last year can be found by following this link to James Roguski’s valuable work.
I also note from your correspondence that: “Our position is that the Australian Government is dedicated to strengthening national and global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response”
“The new agreement is intended to strengthen the international community’s efforts towards future pandemics. It will provide an opportunity to strengthen global health systems, disease surveillance, and enhance equity in pandemic response”.
Threats will be normalised
In support of this, you directed me to an Australian government site that linked to this document:
Strengthening global health and international pandemic response | Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care
This pointed me to: Covid-19 Make it the Last Pandemic. I quote from page 19:
“Most of the new pathogens are zoonotic in origin”.
This seems to ignore the fact that the most recent example of an outbreak – Covid-19 – was almost certainly a human creation, whether from Chapel Hill in North Carolina or Wuhan in China. Alternatively, we could also ask whoever made this virus to stop. My concern is that after viewing these documents they have plans to make more. As an aside, I have recently become aware of alarming links that the Doherty Institute may have with bioweapon research projects overseas.
Instead of looking further into the above document, I thought this complementary report: CSIRO’s strengthening Australia’s Pandemic Preparedness would provide a more relevant and valuable local slant. This report further emphasises my alarm at WHO deliberations. It appears designed to promote permanent vigilance and public anxiety that danger exists around every corner at all times. It intends to be predictive.
It calls for links between local and overseas technocrats who will respond to predefined protocols designed to trigger immediate action overwriting human rights and national sovereignty. By then, individual concerns will be long dispensed with.
Is this alarmism? I refer to the proposed change to Article 3 of the IHR (2005) Amendments referred to in earlier correspondence:
1. The implementation of these Regulations shall be
”with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons”
WILL BE REPLACED BY
”based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.”
I have read this document and the changes are substantial and far-reaching in their implications. The amendments amount to more a complete rewrite rather than minor amendments.
Equity and Inclusivity are being weaponised
Yet, this is just one challenge that looms like an internationally guided missile directed at our sanity and security. There are other government initiatives that seek to curb individual rights and freedoms, supposedly, for the public good. All is coaxed in the terms of equity & inclusivity and demand we sacrifice ourselves in favour of the community.
This was the argument used to enforce Covid compliance. It worked so well that the champions of climate catastrophe, the transgender social program and more recently THE VOICE are now giving this technique a run. The same demonisation of people who question these narratives is freely employed by our sycophantic media and our avoidant political class.
A brief note on the current Transgender push. This project is about as organic and grassroots as a Bill Gates lab meat hamburger. It is backed by an organisation called Human Rights Campaign which is funded by Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, George Soros and Planned Parenthood. In some states of the US, this latter organisation offers adolescent girls puberty blocking medication on the first visit. It is also backed by one of the world’s largest legal firms (now in Australia) which plans to remove the parental right to “interfere” in a child’s gender choice. In the United States, gender clinics have grown from 1 in 2007 to 300 today. This is clearly a very powerful movement. This is an attack on family and society.
Similarly, the Covid project had the backing of the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies, the medical establishment (public and private) across the world, the US Department of Defense (who manufactured the mRNA injections) and the Trusted News Initiative that made sure all of our media told us the same lies about “safe and effective”. There was little that was organic or grassroots about this hugely coordinated campaign. I am similarly concerned very powerful interests sit behind the gender, Voice and climate change urgings.
The World Economic Forum – the elephant with its own government office
Some of this urging comes from the peripatetic and highly influential World Economic Forum (WEF). In my experience, local politicians like to pretend they know nothing of this organisation. If this ploy isn’t doesn’t work, the questioning subject is likely to be labelled a conspiracy theorist.
Yet, this article that you directed me to: “Strengthening global health and international pandemic response”, is linked from an Australian Government website, and reveals the members of the panel overseeing the world’s future response to pandemics. Over half are members of the World Economic Forum. The remaining members are linked to organisations with strong global interests such as the United Nations.
Helen Clark – World Economic Forum
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf – World Economic Forum
Mauricio Cardenas – World Economic Forum
Mark Dybul – World Economic Forum
Joanne Liu – World Economic Forum
David Milliband – World Economic Forum
Ernest Zedillo – World Economic Forum
Thoraya Obaid- variety of high profile links
Malebona Precious Mastoso – UN Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Access to Medicines
and former Director at the World Health Organisation (WHO)
Aya Chebbi – Sustainable Development Goals Action Award Winner
Michael Kazatchine – director Global Fund to Fight Aids
worked “close and personal with Anthony Fauci
Preeti Sudan – former Secretary Health India
Zhong Nanshan – Chinese advisor on health policy
It is time we had a serious discussion about the issues I have raised. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss them with you, personally. Better still, why not hold a public meeting which will give you the opportunity to allay the concerns of Macquarie residents. This would also save you the time of numerous local engagements.