World Health Organisation

There will be a debate over the proposed new WHO Treaty obligations on Monday. I will oppose the UK accepting new legally binding obligations to future WHO decisions unknown.


  1. AncientPopeye
    April 16, 2023

    Good for you Sir, not too many like you in the present Tory Party I’m sad to say?

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      April 16, 2023

      That they are scraping about for the votes of eccentrics and conspiracy theorists shows just how desperate the Tories are.

      1. a-tracy
        April 16, 2023

        Which MPs are you accusing of being eccentric and conspiracy theorists just to give us an idea of your accusation?

      2. Hat man
        April 16, 2023

        Instead of your usual sneering one-liners, lad, can’t you say something positive about what a great idea the Pandemic Treaty is? You know, just to show you’ve read it and know what you’re talking about.

    2. Ian wragg
      April 16, 2023

      No doubt the vast majority of Remain MPs will vote to allow the WHO to dictate future policy.
      After all they let the UN and WEF dictate most other aspects of policy.

  2. Brian Tomkinson
    April 16, 2023

    Good for you. How many other MPs will bother to protect our rights against this unelected unaccountable body? We voted for an independent UK not one ruled by globalist institutions unanswerable to the people. If those in government are incapable of performing their duties on behalf of the sovereign people without being directed by such external bodies, they should step aside and allow those who can and will.

    1. Peter
      April 16, 2023

      Claims from the John Birch Society in the 1950s and 1960s were dismissed, by most, as extremely paranoid fears.

      Nobody worried about the United Nations and its various offshoots.

      Now it seems there were substance in the claims, though globalisation and big government were more of an issue than communism.

    2. a-tracy
      April 16, 2023

      Most of those that will vote against the conservative voters wish for sovereign decision making that elected them are standing down, my MP is and I’m sure he will just trot along like a good boy and vote for the WHO’s obligations over us, it will only aid him in his future prospects elsewhere. Like little stooges.

    3. Wanderer
      April 16, 2023

      +1 @BT. The anti-UK globalist majority will, I fear, vote this through despite the efforts of patriots like our host. I only hope a future government will extract us from these sovereignty-sapping agreements.

    4. British Patriot
      April 16, 2023

      Parliament should NEVER be subject to ANY rules or decisions made by ANY other body, as that would be a denial of democracy itself. Democracy means that those who make the decisions that affect the people are appointed and sacked by the people. This is not a difficult principle to understand but is regularly ignored or overlooked. Parliament must have TOTAL control over ALL the decisions that affect the people. So we cannot accept the authority of ANY external body, be it the WHO, or the ECHR, or the ECJ, or any other organisation. Let’s always keep this principle in the front of our minds when making any international agreement. Or we are not democrats, but fascists. And we fought a war to oppose that! Did we really win?

    5. Mickey Taking
      April 16, 2023

      But they are accountable – to the Chinese.

  3. Nigl
    April 16, 2023

    There must be better ways of wasting your time. Have a long lunch with some friends.

    Your lefties have it.

  4. Mary M.
    April 16, 2023

    Sir John,

    Thank you for this reminder. Our sovereignty is at stake. This Treaty has been drafted by an unelected body.

    The proposed “Pandemic Treaty” debate is public, scheduled for 4:30pm tomorrow, Monday, in Westminster Hall:

    Template emails that could be sent to MPs ahead of the debate:

    1. Cynic
      April 16, 2023

      A power grab by the WHO. Signing legally binding agreements is a negation of democratic government. We have signed up to too many of such already.

      1. MFD
        April 16, 2023

        Totally correct Cynic. We must keep these unelected globalist scum out of our lives.

        Thank you Sir John, I hope a majority are in agreement with you, we do not need any interference from these bodies.
        Our Prime Ministers have grabbed their pens too readily.

      2. Atlas
        April 18, 2023

        Agreed – there is not enough scrutiny of these Treaties.

  5. agricola
    April 16, 2023

    Absolutely correct, one more into the eye of globalism.

  6. Richard1
    April 16, 2023

    Good. One of the principles of our constitution is meant to be that Parliament can’t bind its future self. The more ‘legal obligations’ Parliament signs up to the more this principle is violated. The right structure is a treaty to agree to cooperate on global health issues with policy being determined at the time depending on circs. The equivalent of this WHO proposal is the NATO secretary general being given the legal power on his own initiative to deploy U.K. forces.

  7. matthu
    April 16, 2023

    Thank you, Sir John.

  8. DOM
    April 16, 2023


  9. Lifelogic
    April 16, 2023

    This is their surely appalling Covid Vaccination advice still on the their Website. Excess deaths running at 206 day just in the UK (on the latest published figures) at least Switzerland have finally seen sense. There was never any justification at all to vaccinate younger people and children & it had certainly done serious net harms. Even for the elderly it was/is highly dubious.

    1. Philip P.
      April 16, 2023

      Any MP wanting to vote on this should first consider that the country that did not follow the WHO on Covid, Sweden, has had the lowest mortality rate in the EU, and no or negligible current excess mortality. It also suffered the least economic damage. Britain has come out badly on just about every count, by following the WHO. Is any of this in your House of Commons Library briefings, SIr John? If not, I’d want to know who writes them.

      1. Lifelogic
        April 16, 2023


  10. Radar
    April 16, 2023

    Thank you, Sir J.

    Further, Dr. Tess Lawrie’s article about the WHO’s ‘Pandemic Treaty’ now being peddled as ‘Pandemic Accord’ can be found in The Conservative Woman (TCW) blog, Friday April 14th.

    1. Christine
      April 16, 2023

      I’ve signed the letter to my MP. Not that it will do any good as he’s useless and just follows whatever the government line is.

      A good article in CW which sets out the perils of signing this treaty. As usual it’s all about power and money nothing to do with people’s health. It adds to the growing evidence that the pandemic was a huge con the same as the climate change scam. Why don’t more people wake up to this fact and get rid of these politicians before it’s too late?

      Yet again we see nothing in the MSM.

      1. a-tracy
        April 16, 2023

        The MSM is too busy with Megan, what a joke they are becoming. I will cancel my subscriptions again much more of it. Why on earth don’t their subscribers and readers tell them to STOP, just STOP 🛑 leave the woman alone. All this supposition and a ‘source’ said such and such. ENOUGH, we don’t care. This is our Kings coronation not a soap opera, you are switching people off in their droves. If Harry comes, good thats nice after all it is the biggest event in his father’s life, if his wife doesn’t wish to come then so what, how many people have daughters in law that are troublesome, lots, lots of people can identify with this sort of attention seeking, diverting behaviour and our MSM lap it up like it is actually selling their news, please stop clicking through the links I have and at least that makes me feel better, stop commenting on their click bait articles they may start to get the message.

      2. hefner
        April 16, 2023

        Isn’t it wonderful? Dr Tess Lawrie? from the World Council for Health?
        I’m surprised that Sir John has not yet endorsed both of them.

        1. Philip P.
          April 16, 2023

          Hefner, it’s not just Dr Tess Lawrie, it’s hundreds and thousands of professionals are now seriously concerned. You might want to listen to why consultant cardiologist Prof Aseem Malhotra has changed his mind from a strongly pro-Covid injection position to an anti-Covid injection stance now. “When the facts change, I change my mind,” is always a good motto. I commend Sir John for keeping an open mind and giving it time to see where the facts are going to fall. That is why we should not be ordered what to do by the WHO, and should keep the option of deciding for ourselves, depending on how situations unfold.

  11. Mickey Taking
    April 16, 2023

    It is beholden to the Chinese. You made a good decision.

    1. MFD
      April 16, 2023

      I support that comment 100%

  12. Iain Moore
    April 16, 2023

    I find it beyond belief, we voted to restore our democracy, yet what do our politicians seek to do? Give it away as fast as they can! Worse give it away to a rotten organisation like the WHO , who showed with the pandemic that they are not to be trusted, especially as they have been compromised by the CCP.

    Brock Chisholm, the first Director General of the WHO said…..”To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.”,,,,is this why our political class are rushing to make us subordinate to the WHO, another facet of the 2030 agenda?

    PS Thank you for your intention to vote against it, but for the rest who will no doubt push it through Cromwell had a few words for them….

    //It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.//

    1. a-tracy
      April 16, 2023

      Oh my Iain, this is the first time I read this Brock person’s statement. Who puts them in charge of all of us? What is up with the British public that they’ll let the MSM feed them column after column of whether Megan is coming to the coronation or not when this is going on in the background.

    2. Narrow Shoulders
      April 16, 2023

      The Eu’s first power grab was to make political decisions a competance of trade.

      WHO is following the same model but with health.

  13. Original Richard
    April 16, 2023

    The existence and signing of this treaty guarantees there will be another pandemic let loose on the world so that the UN/WEF can wield their new powers on us.

  14. forthurst
    April 16, 2023

    A profoundly dangerous proposal. Despite being a ‘world’ organisation, it gets ten percent of its income from a source which also has major shareholdings in vaccine manufacture. In much the same way as a pro-mass third world immigration proponent, now deceased, used the UN to promote his obsession with multi-racialism through his ”Global Compact for Migration”, someone else could use the WHO, an agency of the UN, to mandate the killing of millions of people through fake vaccines or ones that simply served to enrich its proponent without scientific evidence of its efficacy. Under no circumstances should we surrender our right to govern ourselves to a profoundly undemocratic body with the power over us of life or death.

  15. Christine
    April 16, 2023

    Penny Mordaunt has already stood up in parliament in response to Andrew Bridgen telling him this WHO treaty is a good idea. What hope do we have if our government has already decided to sign it. It’s like when May signed the migration treaty even when there was a huge opposition against it from the public. It seems to me that politicians have their own agenda with no regard to the public.

    1. Bloke
      April 16, 2023

      Penny is wrong on this occasion.

  16. Kenneth
    April 16, 2023

    Surely it is a given that all MPs would oppose any laws imposed from outside our country.

    1. glen cullen
      April 16, 2023

      99% of MPs are supportive of the ECHRs ….they’re not working for the UK

  17. Elli ron
    April 16, 2023

    How is a debate and a vote needed on such a preposterous loss of sovereignty?
    We have a government which was elected to deal with our issues, it is a monstrous idea of giving crucial decisions about our citizens’ health and our economy to an external body.
    This is a very bad idea made worse by the fact that the WHO is a Chinese satellite which has, in the recent past, made large number of bad decisions.

    1. Bloke
      April 16, 2023

      What the WHO want is solely a matter for them.
      The UK is ours to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish our freedom until death.

  18. RichardP
    April 16, 2023

    Thank you Sir John.
    I hope many MPs can see this Globalist power grab by the WHO for what it is.
    We should not be funding the WHO.

  19. Ian B
    April 16, 2023

    The WHO like so many of these unelected, unrepresentative, jumped up talking heads should not at anytime have any say over what happens anywhere.

    If our own Parliament, our own Government is unable to introduce and administer laws, rules and regulations by democratic means in this Country they should excuse themselves straight away and lets elect proper representation of the people.

    If the people of the UK can’t vote directly for these utterances then they can never be valid

  20. Bryan Harris
    April 16, 2023

    That is the right stance to take.

    How on Earth HMG can justify giving overriding powers to a globalist quango is beyond reason!

    There is certainly no valid reason to give the WHO this authority simply because it seems that we and most other countries follow their advice anyway.

  21. Ian B
    April 16, 2023

    ‘legally binding obligations’ Sir John I am with you on this.

    Legally binding obligations handed down by those that don’t stand for elections in the UK is the UK saying its Government its Parliament isn’t fit for purpose.

    Even if today there might be agreement on the proposal today, there is then no democratic mechanism to amend or repeal if situation and circumstances change.

    Even to think of such a thing suggest many of our Political Class is seeking personal gratification as a diversion from the real job at hand. The Economy, Tax, The NHS, even the BBC

  22. formula57
    April 16, 2023

    To propose open-ended capitulation to the prospective malevolence of the WHO shows that this government is not on the side of the people, nor alas most in this Parliament.

  23. Ian B
    April 16, 2023

    Sir John, is this the same Conservative Government and Parliament that is taking its orders on tax, corporation tax and so on from OECD. Another unelected, unaccountable set of talking heads undermining Democracy.

  24. Jim Whitehead
    April 16, 2023

    We can all recall, surely, the occasion when a smart-Alec pupil tried to embarrass the school teacher with a smirk and a risqué remark, only to be on the receiving end of a corrective and apt put-down which immediately showed the foolish immaturity of the smart-Alec.
    This WHO proposal requires no validation by according it any debating time at all. It should be given the immediate slap down that it deserves and ridiculed for the blatant power-grab which anyone with sense can see, even if there is scarcely anyone of that description or sagacity in the Conservative party at present. Refute it thus!

  25. glen cullen
    April 16, 2023

    I applaud your decision to vote down any law that’s against our freedom …I am also worried about our own government proposed UK smart-phone emergency alert on the 23rd April when our government will take control of everyone’s smart-phone, they’re not just sending a text, they’ll control your functions until you say OK …first the smart-phone, than the smart-meter, than smart-motorways, then they’ll control the smart-EV …whatever next

  26. BW
    April 16, 2023

    Parliament has not recovered from being a minor pimple on the backside of the EU. It is more than happy to let others make the decisions for them.
    Thanks for voting against this. But like everything else nobody in that house of hot air is listening.

  27. Ralph Corderoy
    April 16, 2023

    I heard a recent argument that many of today’s politicians are not much cop. They weren’t forged by war or hardship. They have no underlying philosophy or conviction. They’re ignorant of much, perhaps having a PPE to their name. Consequently, they welcome direction, intervention, and edict from supra-national bodies as it frees them from forming policy and lets them attempt to shirk responsibility when the voter disagrees. Thus countries become homogenised. Competition is verboten as it may show up the status quo.

    Getting back to the WHO, Sweden came under lots of pressure from all quarters for daring to not lock down. Thankfully, they’re now the control group against which all other poodles can be judged. Exactly what the pressure sought to avoid.

  28. John O'Sullivan
    April 16, 2023

    I am delighted that you will oppose this. Thank you

  29. Narrow Shoulders
    April 16, 2023

    Happy to be guided by WHO but not mandated to do anything by them (or the UN, or Unicef or any other organisation that can not be voted against).

    1. Diane
      April 16, 2023

      NS: I have to agree. Guidance is one thing but compulsion will not go down well with the public. Guidance prompts thought and consideration and personal decision making. Compulsion and forced compliance on anything to do with one’s own health is a definite No and anyway prompts rebellion, as we saw during the pandemic on certain issues. Entry into this so called accord, treaty or whatever they want to call it or dress it up should be called out for what it is. It will be interesting to see how many attend this debate.

  30. Enigma
    April 16, 2023

    Thank you Sir John

  31. Wanderer
    April 16, 2023

    Good for you.
    In my view MPs shouldn’t be allowed to give away our sovereignty. At the very least those decisions should put to the electorate for ratification via referendums.

    1. Handbrake
      April 17, 2023

      We lost our sovereignty yearx ago when we had an empire because we pooled it with so many countries worldwide so now we are flooded with the decenents of people who were never meant to be here in the first place – if we only had minded our own business and stayed at home

  32. Bloke
    April 16, 2023

    Allowing some other body to make legally-binding decisions about our future health would be a careless act of reckless self-harm.
    It doesn’t matter WHO they think they are.
    Don’t encourage them. Take back control to get better.

  33. Mark
    April 16, 2023

    Very pleased to see that you plan to oppose this UN overreach.

  34. Jason Cartwright
    April 16, 2023

    Yet you support the EU. LOL.

  35. Derek
    April 16, 2023

    It is hard to even think that this WHO proposal which, in effect, overrules democracy, is even being considered. I fear it is yet another string to the bow that is fast becoming the New World Order. We already know of the Chinese influence over the WHO and it is clear to me who will benefit the most from such an agreement. Only the dumb and the naïve will chose to accommodate this diabolical scam.
    Have they learned nothing from the dangerous, deadly and despicable approach of the WHO and China to the Wuhan virus?

  36. KEvin Ward
    April 17, 2023

    The World Council for Health has published a very informative policy brief against this WHO pandemic treaty and the proposed International Health Regulations (2005) amendments.

  37. James Bertram
    April 18, 2023

    An informed opinion:
    ‘I’m completely open to challenge on this, but think I’m close to the truth.

    If that treaty and the associated but legally separate International Health Regulations are approved, we have transferred sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable body.
    Now, there’s no reason to do this. In the face of a new pathogen, WHO doesn’t know what the best responses are. Nobody does. It’s NOVEL. The way humanity has solved these novel problems throughout history is to make best choices where you are, at the level of community up to country, communicating outcomes as we go, and from these differing outcomes, picking the optimum responses.
    If one body has power to decide, two things are inevitable. First, we won’t have the optimum response, because we’ll never know what that was. The trial wouldn’t have been run. So we’ll stop learning. Secondly, it’s entirely possible that what’s optimal for Nigeria is different from what’s optimal for Norway. We’ll have sacrificed autonomy and democracy for no upside.
    Do not permit this.

    There’s an even more paradoxical problem. Mild illnesses spread without restriction, because people with them aren’t much slowed down by them. Common colds are a case in point. So these can easily go “pandemic”, but no one cares.
    Moderate illnesses like severe influenza spread less readily because the most infectious people are also really quite sick & automatically (without being instructed by government) withdraw from general social mixing. That slows infection.
    Take the most serious illnesses. Ebola does not spread extensively. Through its earliest emergence it’s never been seen as a sizeable outbreak in more than two countries at once and has always burned out swiftly. This isn’t luck. These diseases make those infected so seriously unwell that they stop interacting and possibly spreading it in the first few days. They’re self terminating. Add some precautions but no more than awareness and distance & it is stopped in its tracks. It cannot be otherwise. That’s how human immune systems work and they’ve developed over millennia and more by being in this soup of pathogens.
    I’m saying severe disease global pandemics are immunologically implausible. Perhaps impossible.
    WHO knows this. Your national public health officials know this. Pharma and the regulators know this.
    So why are they all pretending there’s suddenly some huge risk that requires something that’s NEVER happened before in history?
    Giving up the power to decide things in your country is the worst form of treachery I can imagine.
    It’s totally unnecessary and completely unacceptable.
    You know why they’re doing it?
    No, neither do I.
    But I’ve demonstrated there’s no good reason to do this.
    If somebody wanted to undermine democracy and put in place a supranational system, well, this would be a darned good way to start.

    Dr Mike Yeadon

Comments are closed.