Juno News - Is the WHO’s pandemic treaty a cover for government overreach？

00:00:00.000 you're tuned in to the andrew lawton show

00:00:05.920 let's talk about this world health organization business here bruce party had a great piece in

00:00:14.020 the national post about this where he talks about why i think people in canada and around

00:00:18.780 the world should be very concerned he is a law professor at queen's university and the executive

00:00:24.160 director of rights probe and it is always good to see him bruce welcome back thanks for coming on

00:00:29.180 today hello andrew thanks for having me good to see you so i mean there's always this battle whenever

00:00:35.080 we see these international agreements uh where anytime someone raises alarm bells as you rightly

00:00:39.820 have uh you get people say oh it's non-binding what's the big deal don't worry about it and i say

00:00:45.000 well if it's you know so insignificant why bother doing it at all but why is it you find this one

00:00:50.800 to be of particular concern well this this is part of the plan for the next time around yes

00:00:56.820 so i think it goes like this the who takes responsibility for for driving the boat

00:01:06.920 they get authority to declare when a public health emergency happens and they get to make

00:01:13.100 recommendations that will be binding and the countries will promise to put the binding

00:01:19.200 recommendations into place in their own countries now as you say the control is basically still in

00:01:27.220 the hands of the individual governments in those countries but the game here is that i think those

00:01:34.900 governments will use the who's recommendations as cover for their own decisions as in well i'm sorry

00:01:42.500 but the who has recommended lockdown so you have to stay in your house and we're sorry but it's out of

00:01:48.340 our hands so in this way they're sloughing off responsibility for making the hard calls even

00:01:54.540 though hard calls is what they want to make governments are always anxious to avoid responsibility

00:01:59.300 and this is one of the ways they're going to do it that's an incredible point and i think that was one

00:02:05.120 of the big disgraces of the pandemic response i mean around the world but certainly in canada is where

00:02:09.980 you had governments hiding behind public health bureaucrats it happened federally with theresa tam it 1.00

00:02:16.520 happened in pretty much every single province and it you know one of the big issues from a policy

00:02:22.320 perspective is that public health bureaucrats that they have their place i would say it's a far smaller

00:02:27.080 place now that i would give them than i would have given them five six years ago but they're very

00:02:32.540 singularly focused on one metric they're not focused on constitutionality they're not focused on the

00:02:38.540 economy they're not focused on mental health they're not focused on child development they're focused on okay

00:02:43.780 getting cases down even if we could agree on on what a case was and how significant it was

00:02:48.880 and and yeah it's very dangerous for people that we elect to make the decisions which we think are

00:02:53.920 going to come from other experts like a response should have been okay we hear what the public health

00:02:58.740 doctor has to say we hear what the economist has to say we hear what the child psychiatrist has to say

00:03:04.220 and then we make a decision on balance now maybe they wouldn't make the right one but at least there

00:03:08.560 would be a clear delineation of who made the responsibility it's incredibly dangerous as you

00:03:13.900 point out to hide behind the experts which is really what they're agreeing to do here that's

00:03:18.820 exactly right it's it's it's a it's it's a plan to hide and and you know i i have i agree with

00:03:27.660 what you said but i have an even more basic um objection which is that there are some of these

00:03:33.820 decisions that ought not to have been able to be made in the sense that they told people what to do

00:03:38.700 with their own lives and and instructed them on what risks that they were allowed to take themselves

00:03:43.420 which is not a thing that any kind of official ought to have in my books but yes this is going to

00:03:49.480 change the focus from the local officials who who are exercising their discretion

00:03:57.240 to giving them an excuse for saying that they really have no choice which is at which is

00:04:02.880 absolutely not correct so there's one of the arguments against this planned regime from the who

00:04:10.920 is that it will override our sovereignty and it will suspend our constitution and and those two

00:04:19.620 things are really not quite true yes it will have it will affect us detrimentally yes it will

00:04:26.440 appear that we will lose control over the rules that are being applied to us all those things are

00:04:33.140 true but the real the real the real people to finger in this it's not just the who it is actually our own

00:04:43.460 officials our own politicians our own government who number one are eager to sign on to this and number

00:04:50.520 two who actually still have the authority to decide and to decide to what extent they're going to

00:04:57.080 recognize our rights and freedoms our civil liberties and and and the ones who are failing to weigh all the

00:05:04.440 factors that that you that you mentioned they are the ones who are really at fault and they are the ones who

00:05:09.480 are democratically accountable to us the officials in the who the bureaucrats in the who are not accountable to us

00:05:15.320 they are accountable to the countries that put together this agreement so our first line of of

00:05:21.560 of attack if you like to put it that way are the people who purport to represent us and they are the

00:05:26.600 ones who are falling down on the job yes and we've already seen uh in one notable way i'll describe

00:05:32.840 momentarily where our government is all too willing to go along with this and that's on regulating discourse so

00:05:37.640 uh in this draft agreement uh the it says that countries would commit to censoring quote false

00:05:44.040 misleading misinformation or disinformation unquote now these are terms we've heard the federal government

00:05:50.760 in canada talk about warranting a government response already and we know that the government

00:05:56.280 in canada is uh doing an overhaul of internet regulations as we speak well here we have a prime example

00:06:02.280 where these two agendas seem to be aligned already it's perfect it's perfect i mean can't you

00:06:07.480 just imagine the government saying well you know we were we're concerned about this but the who

00:06:12.680 basically has told us that this kind of information should not be allowed because it interferes with

00:06:17.400 global health global health my goodness well we can't ignore that so we're going to have to put in

00:06:22.600 in place regulations that require you to or prohibit you from you know questioning the the the narrative

00:06:30.760 that the who is put forward as to what's important to keep people alive all right so that's it's it's a

00:06:36.200 perfect excuse for the government to do what it already wants to do and in that way make it appear

00:06:43.720 as though they're not the one making the call i i just checked on youtube where we're streaming live

00:06:49.640 right now because every now and then we get like the big disclaimer that youtube throws up on our shows

00:06:54.280 depending on what we're talking about and i don't know if they put it up live or if they put it up after

00:06:57.720 the fact we don't have one now but often no we didn't get it yet sean but like if you talk about

00:07:02.680 climate change you'll get like a disclaimer if you talk about covid you will uh and sometimes it's

00:07:07.320 like a disclaimer from health canada other times it's from the world health organization and uh the

00:07:12.120 the information they give you so we already have i mean there's an example of big tech on its own

00:07:17.080 deciding to outsource you know truth basically to the world health organization and just imagine if you

00:07:23.160 go one step further and make that a deputization by the state to do the same thing and i i don't think

00:07:29.560 you know being able to say it with a disclaimer will even satisfy what countries want i think they

00:07:35.000 want you to not be able to say it at all oh oh no question no question and sure so so

00:07:43.240 the the proponents of this will say quite rightly actually that this does not suspend the

00:07:48.840 constitution you know your rights and freedoms are still in place the who doesn't have the power 0.59

00:07:54.600 to to set the constitution aside that is true but we've already seen that during the first round

00:08:01.320 the charter of rights and freedoms was not very useful the courts did not come to the conclusion

00:08:07.960 that a lot of these measures violated the charter right so just because the charter is not being

00:08:12.760 suspended doesn't mean that you're going to have your civil liberties and if if if if international

00:08:19.480 norms change and and the cause is a global cause and a court a canadian court is interpreting what

00:08:27.880 the constitution means then it's just as likely that that court especially given the track record

00:08:33.720 is going to say well of course you still have your rights but in this case

00:08:38.200 your the infringement of your rights are are are either not existing or they're justified under section

00:08:44.520 one of the charter because after all we have this emergency and then who has said so so this this

00:08:49.720 this the the this it does these this plan does not have to suspend our constitution in order for the

00:08:57.000 plan to be a very bad idea yeah i think that's a very valid point and i'd go back to where you

00:09:02.840 mentioned a few moments ago as being the first line of defense on this which is the nation state it's

00:09:07.320 countries that need to have pressure put on them by their citizens to perhaps change or scrap this process

00:09:13.560 i mean i'm looking around at the world here and not to say i i have a firm grip on every domestic

00:09:20.040 government around the world but if i look at the big players i'm not seeing anyone with one exception

00:09:25.720 that i think would push back against that and that one exception maybe is the argentinian president i i

00:09:31.320 mean i know he's an economic libertarian i don't know if he wants to be the bull in the china shop on

00:09:36.840 the world stage at some of these and and say no we're not signing on to this who knows argentina

00:09:41.960 doesn't wield a huge amount of power but the united states does and i don't think joe biden

00:09:46.680 is going to say no to this uh i don't think canada will the uk has a nominally conservative government

00:09:51.880 but as you and i actually discussed in the uk not really uh when you talk about all these things so

00:09:56.840 i i don't see any countries that are going to want to put their necks out and say whoa i i'm not

00:10:01.080 signing on to this in its current form no i think that's a correct assessment i and in fact it's

00:10:07.000 difficult to know exactly what's going on behind the scenes as this thing is negotiated but but i

00:10:11.960 would guess that a lot of these countries are actually pushing for this for the very reason that

00:10:15.560 it's that it's to their advantage so that they are set up better than they were last time to do the

00:10:21.720 same kinds of things as last time and worse like like the like the more targeted prohibition on

00:10:28.440 expression of dissenting views so obviously we have to be a bit forward looking here and uh we hear i

00:10:36.360 mean that clip i played from justin trudeau earlier he's talking about oh pandemics for years to come so

00:10:40.760 you know i've gone my entire life without ever having a pandemic until the last few years as have you

00:10:45.400 as have you know anyone who was born after the spanish flu basically and uh now we're being told this

00:10:50.920 is just going to be business as usual which i think is in and of itself a bit suspicious because

00:10:54.840 we've seen the the public healthification of everything and i think that's another part here

00:10:59.160 that is not really said in the treaty which is that what they decide to call a public health emergency

00:11:05.800 is a big issue i mean we hear people saying that you need to make obesity a pandemic you need to make

00:11:11.000 climate change a pandemic and all of a sudden you take these powers and apply them to all of these

00:11:15.640 other things and we've got a big problem on our hands yeah no question no question this is this

00:11:20.440 this is this is very broad discretionary vague power to declare an emergency you know when you

00:11:27.480 feel like it people have referred to this as the beginning of the biomedical states and i think

00:11:32.600 they're right this is this is this is a new era they're normalizing what happened during covet and this

00:11:41.400 this this this is this is this is bad news they're obviously you can see it in justin trudeau's comment

00:11:47.800 comments they're they're planning for this to be the normal thing where the powers that they exercise

00:11:54.120 are going to be powers that they exercise regularly whenever they think it's justified and believe me

00:11:59.880 if you have power the state is going to use them all right bruce party it is a fantastic piece in the

00:12:05.880 national post who health treaty a convenient cover for more government overreach you are the best one

00:12:11.960 one on the army against the technocrats so we're glad to have you bruce thanks so much thanks andrew

00:12:17.240 good to see you thanks for listening to the andrew lawton show support the program by donating to true north

00:12:22.440 good to see you at www.tnc.news

Juno News - January 15, 2024

Is the WHO’s pandemic treaty a cover for government overreach？

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript