The Planetary Management Treaty

There are several troubling aspects to the latest WHO Pandemic Treaty Oct 16, 2023 update. It's not just the creation of the Conference of the Parties, which work to separate people even further from levers of power. But the implementation specifics One Health is also troubling.

I covered the details of the latest update yesterday, but having had a day to sleep on it, it fits in rather well with a different, multi-decade initiative.

-

‘Reaffirming the importance of multisectoral collaboration at national, regional, and international levels to safeguard human health, detect and prevent health threats at the animal and human interface, zoonotic spill-over and mutations and to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals and ecosystems, in a One Health approach...‘

Loosely translated, it means that the relationship between human and animals - one considered under serious stress by most United Nations systems, due to human use of land and water - needs balancing. And if our needs affect the ecosystem as a whole, then our footprint will need to come down - translating into either drastically lower standards of living - especially for those of us in the west, or far fewer of us.

Article 5 - One Health - states that parties (nations) agree to (5.3) integrate interventions into other legislation, (5.4b) implement a whole-of-society approach, and (5.7) take steps to integrate the labs & global surveillance in line with -

Article 16 -  International collaboration and cooperation - 'The Parties shall collaborate and cooperate with competent international and regional intergovernmental organizations and other bodies', where the rather opaque ‘bodies’ are introduced later, through -

Article 21 - Conference of the Parties - outlining the creation of this organisation (COP), with a purpose of global implementation and maintenance of the Pandemic Plan, and consequently - through One Health - balancing and optimizing ecosystem health.

Article 28 - Amendments - can be proposed by parties to the WHO Pandemic Plan, but adoption is the sole responsibility of the COP. Voting - should consensus fail, as it commonly does - means three quarters majority of present and voting parties. And there’s no requirement for either turning up, or even voting when present.

Article 24 - Secretariat - details how the WHO will provide the functions of a thusly declared Secretariat of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which will render administrative duties for the COP, ultimately meaning that the WHO will be in charge of legislative initiation.

And this is similar to how the European Union works, where MEPs do not have the power of legislative initiation, instead resting with the Commission, meaning that even if the entire chamber is in agreement, if the Commission does not allow for the vote, legislation won’t pass. It's incredibly undemocratic.

The election of Tedros (and Margaret Chan) was marred by accusations of fraud. And Tedros himself is no stranger to accusations thereof, either. Amendments to the WHO Pandemic Treaty could hypothetically be passed on basis of who presents the larger wheelbarrow of dollar bills. And parties (nations) are legally required to implement said amendments.

The COP further at will get to create subsidiary bodies, including (21.9) an Implementation and Compliance Committee, a Panel of Experts providing scientific advise (occupied by the same experts who brought you lockdowns and claims of zoonotic origin), and a WHO PABS System Expert Advisory Group, telling you how to interpret the surveillance data accessed through -

Article 12 - Access and benefit-sharing - detailing a created WHO Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System, which will organise and monetise surveillance data gathered, through a (12.4.b) 20% cut of sales of big pharma's resulting vaccines, working on data gathered through -

Article 4 - Pandemic prevention and public health surveillance - integrating Antimicrobial Resistance, animal surveillance, and environmental factors into the (4.5) integrated surveillance comprising of not just the 60+ illnesses currently tracked, but also the Determinants of Health, and - as outlined by the One Health Joint Plan of Action 2022-26 - the food supply, wastewater, water supply, air quality, climate data, and any chemical they deem to be environmentally unsound.

In other words, surveillance will gather absolutely anything and everything it can, including satellite data, eventually.

-

There are other, serious issues with this document. But this is enough.

That our elected alleged representatives are even entertaining this debate should frankly tell you all you need to know.

Because this is the Blueprint For Planetary Management, which lines right up with Planetary Health.