This agreement is a priority for WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who called it a "generational commitment not to go back to the old cycle of panic and neglect." The WHO is considering 300 amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005. The new powers that would be included in the amendments to the legally binding rulebook set out obligations for its member states to prepare for and respond to outbreaks and other public health risks.
The exact wording is getting WHO to coordinate sharing drugs, tests, personal protective equipment (PPE) and vaccines across the planet. "Parties recognize WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response during the public health Emergency of International Concern and undertake to follow WHO's recommendations in their international public health response," the proposed amendments included.
A measure that came up suggested that member states should comply with any advice issued during future pandemics, such as enforcing vaccine passports and border closures. According to Daily Mail, member states would have to use five percent of health budgets in preparing for another pandemic if the proposed amendments are given the go-ahead.
However, critics describe the measures as "unprecedented land grab" of the WHO.
Molly Kingsley, founder of UsForThem, which campaigned against school closures and masks in classrooms during the pandemic, said: "The Government have come back and said, well actually we're quite worried too. And they're right to be because this is a really, really unprecedented land grab by the WHO."
"What the proposals do is change what is currently guidance that the WHO gives to binding recommendations," she told Talk TV. "And that includes binding recommendations over things like lockdown, mandatory vaccination, quarantine, isolation and restrictions on travel. You have to ask, who is the WHO to be granting themselves powers?"
The IHR working group is set to meet again in July, October and December and will agree on an amendment package to present during the World Health Assembly (WHA) in May next year.
In a Telegraph write-up, Karol Sikora, a consultant oncologist and former director of the WHO cancer program, expressed concerns about the WHO considering proposals for a "pandemic treaty" as he is well aware of the "eye-watering waste and incompetence that oozes from every crevice of that organization." (Related: The most dangerous international treaty ever proposed.)
"Very strong on politics, very weak on expertise. Just look at how China was treated throughout a pandemic that some say was of their own making, albeit accidentally," he pointed out.
According to Sikora, WHA delegates always arrive in an impressive line of black chauffeured cars, complete with flags and diplomatic plates. "But the intellectual content inside the chamber is just appalling. There is more knowledge and lively discussion to be had with a group of first-year medical students. Expensive meals and cocktail party gossip about who's in and who's out are high on the agenda – not what's needed for improving global healthcare," he wrote.
"If WHO is given any level of binding control and made a global authority on public health measures, then I really do fear for all freedom-loving societies. A pandemic response can only be a national decision, considering all different medical, cultural, and societal factors that are so wonderfully different across the globe. It can never be one size fits all – it cannot be done in negotiation with communist states like China."
Visit MedicalFascism.news for more stories related to WHO's draconian plans.
Watch the video below where Tedros calls for global pandemic accord.
This video is from the Covid Times channel on Brighteon.com.