Signing international Treaties

The U.K. has signed too many Treaties in my life so far. They seek to bind the country in for the long term. Where they succeed it offends one of our fundamental democratic principles that one Parliament cannot bind a successor. If a government signs up to a Treaty obligation which the Opposition disagrees with then it is particularly offensive as the incoming Government will find it difficult to disengage. I and my friends had two wins when both main parties wanted to sign the Maastricht Treaty. To secure it through Parliament the government had to gain the opt out from the single currency, the main point of the Treaty. It also secured an exit clause from the EU as a whole, which transformed our options and outlook.

Other Treaties do not offer such good opt outs or fail to include an exit clause. They become ways of freezing policy on an issue to the global consensus at the time of their making which may prove wrong or damaging. I do not think it would be a good idea to sign a binding Treaty designed by the World Health Organisation based on the current level of pandemic knowledge. We should learn from their data and experience and incorporate their best ideas in our future health management but not bind ourselves in.

All Treaties are in practice subject to revision or termination if all the signatories come to agree they are outdated or wrong. Some Treaties are necessary to settle a peace. These should not be disrupted by a losing combatant when they get stronger, but may need UN or other external guarantors. Treaties about everything from the environment to health usually go too far in crimping democracy. Sign too many and swathes of self government are constrained or prevented, or a future government has to exit them or amend unilaterally how to interpret them.

167 Comments

  1. Mark B
    May 15, 2022

    Good morning.

    To conquer a nation one does not need to resort to arms, one needs friends (fifth columnists) in the right places and patience. This is how both the EU and the CCP work as opposed to the old methods that the USA and USSR / Russia employ. Far less bloodier and ultimately, far more successful because by the time you have realised what has happened and try to do something about it, it is usually too late – Witness BREXIT.

    We have fifth columnists both in Parliament and the Civil Service and other institutions such as education plus, various NGO’s, fake charities and pressure groups. We also have a media, led by Auntie, that will promote and perpetuate falsehoods (Climate Change) to reinforce a narrative.

    It seems that, with the right tactics, the pen indeed is mightier than the sword.

    Reply
    1. Sharon
      May 15, 2022

      JR you are correct in what you say and also Mark B. International treaties are a crafty way of conquering countries, or the world…

      Reply
      1. X-Tory
        May 15, 2022

        Parliament represents the people. If parliament is constrained then the people are constrained. That is a denial of freedom and democracy. No British government should ever feel under any obligation to obey any treaty.

        Reply
        1. DavidJ
          May 15, 2022

          +1

          Reply
        2. hefner
          May 17, 2022

          And the corollary is, I guess, that no other government should ever feel under any obligation to obey any treaty with the UK.

          Foreign Policy 101, isn’t it?

          Reply
          1. Dennis
            May 17, 2022

            If you Google ‘How many treaties/agreements etc. has the US broken ‘ there are pages and pages describing the many from way back. It seems no one cares about this as it’s the US that does it.
            The US/Iran nuclear ‘deal’ or ‘agreement ‘ was pulled out of so there should be no more ‘Treaties’ but only ‘deals’ and ‘agreements’ to make life easier.

    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      May 15, 2022

      The world is changing, get over it.

      Reply
      1. a-tracy
        May 15, 2022

        NLH – No

        Reply
      2. Fedupsoutherner
        May 15, 2022

        NLH. Change is fine and we can all accept it if it’s been carefully thought through with the consequences taken into account leading to a better outcome. Sadly I don’t see much of that. I just don’t see how one rule can apply to all countries. We’ve seen it with the draconian ways of the EU. One rule is not fit for purose for all.

        Reply
        1. Peter2
          May 15, 2022

          I agree with you FUS.
          And it has to be democratically driven.

          Reply
      3. DavidJ
        May 15, 2022

        Absolutely NO. We neither need nor want a government which is a puppet of the evil globalists.

        Reply
    3. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Indeed and so rarely are the long term practical effect of the treaty even considered. This often driven by idiotic group think, virtue signalling or the desire of (usually scientifically and economically ignorant) politicians to be seen announcing some save the world agreement. This regardless of however daft and harmful the agreement is – with the vital footage of them signing & shaking hands with another often deluded leader. The interests of politicians, civil servants and their vested interest hangers on is almost invariably directly against those of the voters and citizens.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        May 15, 2022

        Can someone please explain to tax to death socialist Sunak why windfall taxes are such an appalling idea. Almost as bad as his vast increases so far, his failure to cancel net zero, HS2, his vastly extended lockdown, his eat out to help out lunacy, his money printing inflation policy, his freezing of allowances and all the vast government waste…

        I see the head of the BoE is to be questioned on his incompetent management of inflation (or was high inflation a deliberate but dishonest policy agreed with Sunak? Can they also ask him about his mad one size for all bank overdraft interest policy (while he was at the FCC) which pushed interest rates up from say base plus 2.5% to 39% or even 78% at one bank. Total insanity to have the same rate for all customers in effect he has banned overdrafts for sensible borrowers. Just this action show he is totally unsuitable to even run a piggy bank.

        Reply
      2. DavidJ
        May 15, 2022

        +1

        Reply
    4. R. Adams
      May 15, 2022

      The UK must exit membership of the Gates/China owned WHO and stop giving them millions of our taxpayer money . World Gov ?
      Neon Danke .

      Reply
      1. DavidJ
        May 15, 2022

        Indeed RA; world government is their aim.

        Reply
      2. TooleyStu
        May 18, 2022

        That is the big issue.
        Once the W-H-O agreement has been signed, the Uk loses its right of self governance.
        It is being signed this week.
        That is ‘game over’.
        Pack up your cards etc, dear MP’s, you are no longer in control.

        May God help us.

        Reply
  2. Mark B
    May 15, 2022

    Good morning – again

    Sorry Sir John off-topic.

    I have just watched the latest episode of Harry’s Farm on YT. Towards the end he gives his views on food prices and DEFRA’s Re-wilding program. Some of his neighbours have taken up on this madcap scheme and have left they land to grow fallow. He believes that this is a mistake as this land could be better used to grow food and help keep prices down. What is the Secretary of State responsible for this doing to reverse this policy and, what is it prepared to do to help both pig and chicken farmers who face bankruptcy ? Previous governments have found vast amounts of money for the EU, banks, PPE and to bribe people to stay stay at home and do nothing, it can find the cash to keep people fed.

    This issue is more serious that what is going on in Ukraine or elsewhere !

    Reply
    1. BOF
      May 15, 2022

      Agreed Mark B. Food security is vital for any country and what is happening is nothing less than criminal. The UN, Gates, WHO and WEF then have the nerve to warn of world food shortages when they support these policies. These organisations need keeping at arms lenth.

      Reply
      1. DavidJ
        May 15, 2022

        +1

        Reply
      2. Timaction
        May 16, 2022

        +1. Energy policy and defence spending are also priorities but that doesn’t appear in the heads of those in Westminster. The lunacy of net zero whilst importing these supplies and materials is madness We are in need of a serious review on where our taxes are being spent and cutting out the waste. A bonfire of quangos. The Civil Serpents who refuse to go to work should be sacked. There are far to many doing nothing. If they can be working from home/abroad a cheaper employee is available! Foreign aid is the last priority but seems on the top of the legacies foolishness. Everything foreign needs support whilst we just get taxed to the hilt.

        Reply
    2. MFD
      May 15, 2022

      Well said Mark, letting land become covered by brambles benefits nobody, its a moronic city slicker idea.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        May 15, 2022

        Well just blackberry and cob nut pickers, butterflies, bees and other insects, birds and some other animals perhaps.

        Reply
    3. Sharon
      May 15, 2022

      I don’t think most ministers have been privy to the master plan of what all these international plans and green stuff are about. I believe they’ve had to work it out for themselves, as has Joe Public.

      Which is why, those of us who’ve sussed out some of the master plan, look on in horror. Wake up quicker please MPs!

      Reply
      1. Diane
        May 15, 2022

        Sharon: Well if they’ve read certain newspaper & certain individuals’ output they might be as enlightened as I am today of imminent catastrophe as I muse over Carbon Bombs, the climate emergency, a code red for humanity, us all being killed by fossil fuels, our ‘last chance’, our running out of time, the catastrophe of global heating, the demand for a retrofit revolution and a Green New Deal ( many thousands of new green jobs of course and not forgetting lots of notes in many pockets) but no wonder some are scared to death.

        Reply
    4. Fedupsoutherner
      May 15, 2022

      Mark. I said as much in a post a few days ago. We saw so many fields in bad condition ie. Full of weeds and docks etc with no livestock on it and not good enough for silage. Looked like rewilding to us. A complete waste.

      Reply
    5. J Bush
      May 15, 2022

      + many
      Pauperise the plebs with high food, energy, housing, vehicle fuel costs, ever rising taxes to be given to other countries etc, to force them into debt. But don’t despair the State will ‘accept’ your assets to pay off your debts (the ones the State deliberately created), whilst you will own nothing, you will (according to WEF) be happy…

      What other explanation can there be for the Johnson regime idiocy, apart from insanity.

      Reply
    6. Paul Cuthbertson
      May 15, 2022

      Mark B – Re-wilding–>Abandonment. It is all part of your Globalist UK Establishment plan.

      Reply
  3. Ian Wragg
    May 15, 2022

    Signing treaties removes Parliament from making decisions. That’s why they do it.
    We are stuck with umanrites which are a detriment to the UK population.
    We have the dreaded NIP which Bozo blusters but does nothing.
    I think JRM should be tasked with unwinding some of the more damaging ones.

    Reply
    1. Shirley M
      May 15, 2022

      I am coming to that conclusion too. Many UK politicians still prefer being under EU rule, as opposed to a democratic sovereign UK and they still hamper progress on Brexit and give the EU priority. The EU made the decisions for them, the EU did the work, and the EU took the blame. If they can’t make the effort to put the UK and the electorates decisions first, then they shouldn’t even be UK politicians.

      Reply
      1. Denis Cooper
        May 15, 2022

        I noticed the editor of the Belfast News Letter writing about Hilary Benn:

        “Yesterday I was on Irish radio alongside that Europhile politician, after whom the 2019 Benn Act, or ‘Surrender Act’, was named (which this government says boxed them in and caused them to have to agree the protocol). I was surprised by the extent to which Mr Benn is urging the EU to be flexible over the difficulties caused by the Irish Sea border.”

        Clicking on this link:

        https://twitter.com/hilarybennmp/status/1525145440559239168?cxt=HHwWgMC49dLss6oqAAAA

        and then clicking twice on “Thread” should take you to the first of a string of 23 comments that he made, all without any apparent remorse for his role in this debacle.

        Reply
      2. Mark B
        May 15, 2022

        +1

        It seems old and very advantageous habits die hard.

        Reply
      3. DavidJ
        May 15, 2022

        +1

        Reply
    2. Dave Andrews
      May 15, 2022

      I welcome the provision of human rights, and they should apply to immigrants, for example.
      When does annoy me is that others have their human rights defended at my expense. If my human rights are violated, I have to calculate whether it’s worth shedding treasure to defend them, or whether I should just suck it up – I make a business decision.
      Defend the human rights of immigrants of course, but let those who defend do so pro bono, and let them stand guarantors for the court costs, posting bail and maintenance of the individuals they represent.

      Reply
    3. matthu
      May 15, 2022

      There is a petition urging the government not to sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty without it having been approved via public referendum.

      https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/614335

      Reply
    4. MFD
      May 15, 2022

      Watch closely Ian, I hear Johnson is going to NI tomorrow, the Brit population are at ropes end and no more to give, he will get a rough ride . Hopefully he will wake up !

      Reply
  4. turboterrier
    May 15, 2022

    The country is suffering from too many treaties and laws that have been passed over the years as you have highlighted your concerns in today’s post.
    What makes it so sad if not frightening is that some of the agreements the country was signed upto are now restricting taking actions that are causing serious problems which are affecting everybody in the country.
    Politicians are afraid to question the need, practicalities, necessity of still being restricted by all these treaties and laws.
    You are a lone voice for the those that fully understand the need for continual improvement in everything we do but sadly the qualities of the new generation of MPs leave a lot to be desired. One could argue it is the fault of the hierarchy and Central Offices that one would assume should be constantly highering the bar so we get those with the vision, experience and bloody mindness to see where and what is needed and get it done

    Reply
  5. Javelin
    May 15, 2022

    War Treaties are only honoured if there is a good chance of winning otherwise wise they would be called War Crimes.

    Reply
  6. Cynic
    May 15, 2022

    Constraining future governments in this way is indeed a perversion of democracy. Many of our present problems are due to treaties signed many years ago.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Indeed the proposed WHO treaty is appalling as are UK laws that set idiotic & binding forward commitments such a net zero. These laws stop any real & honest debate. The only debate then becomes – how we can we meet these mad legally binding commitments. Not why on earth we have such mad and damaging commitments and how can we remove them. Theresa May’s premiership did quite enough damage without lumbering us the net zero religion. Her only positive was opt out organ donation – still that is one better than the appalling Blair era I suppose.

      Indeed the WHO itself appalling too controlled far too much by China who were surely culpable in Covid.

      Reply
    2. Everhopeful
      May 15, 2022

      +many
      Ha!Ha!
      We thought ( we really did ) that globalisation would WESTERNISE other political and social powers.
      Whereas they actually just looked at us and muttered “You idiots”.
      Then they infiltrated and destroyed us with wokery.
      They got us to flagellate ourselves into total compliance and now we are all but conquered!

      Reply
      1. Everhopeful
        May 15, 2022

        Now they are kidding us that we don’t need to grow our own food or mine OUR coal and use all the FREE ENERGY we were God-given.
        And our idiot governments have fallen for it.
        As a kid I was middle-classly instructed to play the games my visitors wanted to play.
        Unfortunately, I still had to play what they wanted when I visited their houses.
        I was programmed into polite self-effacing subservience.
        Like our leaders have done on our behalf. To maybe burnish THEIR halos.
        WE are the collateral damage!!

        Reply
        1. BOF
          May 15, 2022

          +1 E h.

          Reply
        2. DavidJ
          May 15, 2022

          +1

          Reply
  7. turboterrier
    May 15, 2022

    Everyone I know have big concerns over the WHO treaty. Yet we seem to have a PM who can’t see the wood for rhe trees and has indicated he is in agreement with the WHO. Is it that with all the fall out from the pandemic signing such a treaty ensures the blame is someone else’s fault?

    Reply
    1. Mary M.
      May 15, 2022

      Turbo, I thank you for reminding people of this.

      For anyone concerned, here is the link to the petition ‘Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum’:

      https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/614335

      Reply
      1. Fedupsoutherner
        May 15, 2022

        Mary. Thanks. Already signed and written to my useless MP.

        Reply
    2. Brian Tomkinson
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
    3. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Indeed.

      Matt Ridley today in the Sunday Telegraph.

      A WHO pandemic pact would leave the world at China’s mercy
      Lessons have not been learned, so why should we trust our global health watchdog in a future crisis?

      Reply
    4. Everhopeful
      May 15, 2022

      +1000
      Given his ( and chums) flouting of rules last time does he have no intention of observing whatever pet-slaughtering rules the WHO comes up with?
      Does he KNOW that any “pandemic” measures will not affect him and his ilk?

      Reply
      1. Fedupsoutherner
        May 15, 2022

        Everhopeful. If they want anarchy then just try and force vaccination on us and getting rid of our pets. Where’s the pitchfork

        Reply
    5. Stred
      May 15, 2022

      When Trump withdrew US support for WHO, Johnson doubled ours to more than any other country. He also seems to be following the UN Migration Treaty in practice with the Rwandan story as a decoy for survival purposes.

      Reply
    6. Nottingham Lad Himself
      May 16, 2022

      Does everyone that you know also have an arguably illegal breed of dog?

      Reply
  8. The other Christine
    May 15, 2022

    I’m very pleased to read, Sir John, that you have reservations about the UK signing the legally binding WHO Pandemic Treaty. It is widely recognised that the WHO is in the pocket of the CCP and works hand in the glove with a certain Bill Gates. For the UK to sign away our right to make decisions for our country would be totally egregious. For those who are unclear what the implications of this treaty are, Neil Oliver has given a very clear explanation on GB News (readily available on various platforms). He describes this treaty as ‘the greatest power grab any of us has seen in our lifetime’ and on this he is totally correct. Under no circumstances must we sign up to this. I hope Sir John will express his concerns at the highest level but in the meantime we can email the Prime Minister to let him know our views.

    Reply
    1. DaveM
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
    2. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
    3. Everhopeful
      May 15, 2022

      +++++ many
      Agree 100%

      Reply
    4. Fedupsoutherner
      May 15, 2022

      Christine. I signed the petition against this yesterday and sent a letter to my MP. I don’t expect to hear from him.

      Reply
    5. Diane
      May 15, 2022

      The Other Christine: Agreed & very concerning. Neil Oliver summed up exactly the opinions and what many of us are feeling about what appears to be just another part of the groundwork for global governance where we are expected to listen to and be controlled by experts who are clearly not experts. Listening not a problem but transparency and debate must be called for before this power grab exerts the influence of scores of other nations over our own parliament & government. The PM has been in support of this for quite some time now it seems. Our politicians should not be able to hide behind such a treaty without reference to their constituents. The petition to parliament (614335) is still increasing rapidly by thousands as we speak.

      Reply
    6. The Prangwizard
      May 15, 2022

      TOChristine

      Sir John has reservations, doesn’t think it will be a good idea to sign up.

      Typical tough words from Sir John. I dare say Boris is trembling in fear and clearly will have been put off.

      I see Boris is quoted as telling MPs in NI to get back to work. Clearly he’s not going to correct our position he gave away to the EU in the deal he signed.

      Gutless Boris will bow before the EU and the USA. He has no respect for the UK.

      Reply
    7. MFD
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
    8. DavidJ
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
  9. Nigl
    May 15, 2022

    Speak to Ms Truss. Selling out British farmers to get a deal with Australia as she desperately runs around the world with her pen at the ready, trying to convince the U.K. electorate that this government is taking advantage of post Brexit freedoms.

    However as we know, it is not. Just like the waste and inefficiency in the civil service that the general public has known about and endured for umpteen years, it is only now desperately talking up taking action, albeit still all talk, because it is in trouble in the polls.

    And in other news the ST has a story about a person looking to install a heat pump finding out that it would cost up to £30 k because the whole central heating system needing replacing, especially fitting larger radiators with some rooms too small to take them. Add larger pipes and the subsequent re dec, I have wooden floors so underfloor heating to be added, we are getting up to £ 50k as has been quoted before.

    The government is either lying about the cost or is in La La land.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Indeed £50k+ cost is very likely to retrofit in a medium size older house. Plus it will cost more to run as electricity is so much more expensive than gas and cost more to maintain too. You may well need a beefed up electricity supply – again expensive. It will also be slower to heat the house up and be less effective or convenient in general. It will not even save much CO2 in reality as much of the electricity will come from gas with 50% of the energy wasted as heat at the generator and in transmission.

      Reply
    2. Original Richard
      May 15, 2022

      Nigl : “The government is either lying about the cost or is in La La land.”

      Both in fact and is being very devious. They know there is no way it is possible to provide an affordable and reliable supply matching demand electricity supply requiring the 300GW of power or more for heat pumps and evs by using wind turbines.

      Therefore the plan is to use the BBC/MSM to so frighten us into believing there is a climate crisis – based upon a global warming temperature increase of just 0.15 degrees C or even less per DECADE – and thus accepting drastic reductions in quality of life, freedoms and security in order to zero our 1% contribution to man-made CO2 emissions.

      Reply
    3. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Indeed not only are they lying or deluded about the costs but there is no real benefit even in co2 terms of switching to heat pumps in most situations and they are, in many ways, both much more expensive and much less convenient. We have no spare, cheap enough, low carbon electricity to drive them with anyway. The capital and running costs of switching are huge.

      Reply
    4. dixie
      May 16, 2022

      A simpler approach would be to look at high temperature Air-to-Water heat pump which basically replaces the boiler with a heat exchanger but the rest of the pipework and radiators could be unchanged. It would still be very expensive though (I estimate around 15-18K for a 4 bed) and you would be relying on competence in the government to maintain a proper level of electricity supply.
      So, a high risk strategy but what else is there – we cannot rely on imported energy and fuels nor plan on the basis that energy will get cheaper. North Sea and fracking would only be short term stop gaps, we must find sustainable solutions that don’t rely on hot air (geological gas) and pixie dust (Fusion)

      Reply
  10. Denis Cooper
    May 15, 2022

    Many years ago somebody told me that one reason the archtraitor Heath wanted us in the EEC was to tie the hands of the next Labour government. But I can’t remember who said it and maybe it was not true.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2022

      Any decent real Conservative PM would have sensible, small government, pro jobs policies to ensure that politics of envy Labour never ever got in ever again. Especially as it would now be Labour/SNP/Libdim/Green/Plaid. But alas we have had to suffer idiotic socialist, generally pro EU “Tory” PMs like Heath, Major, Cameron, May, Boris… even Thatcher made many errors and failed to cut the state down to size. They all fell for climate alarmism even Thatcher.

      Reply
      1. John Hatfield
        May 15, 2022

        Perhaps they threw her out before she could get round to cutting the state down to size. She had a hard enough battle with the coal miners, flying pickets etc.

        Reply
        1. Nottingham Lad Himself
          May 16, 2022

          Yes, crushing the ordinary person in a country of 60 million can be a bit time-consuming.

          Reply
    2. Shirley M
      May 15, 2022

      Knowing how well the EU pays it’s politicians and MEP’s, along with generous tax concessions and (virtually) unlimited expenses, all designed to induce loyalty to the EU over that of nation states, it was more likely an offer too good to refuse.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        May 15, 2022

        +1

        Reply
      2. Paul Cuthbertson
        May 15, 2022

        Shirley M – the corrupt EU gravy train along with NATO, UN, WEF, The Council for Foreign Relations, Trilateral Group, Bilderberg Group, The Clinton Foundation, Paris Climate Accord and many, many others.

        Reply
  11. Law Don
    May 15, 2022

    Yesterday you were telling us sovereignty means the UK can scrap the Protocol (part of an international treaty), today you say the opposite. Make your mind up!

    reply Today I am saying the EU has broken the Protocol and we have several good legal routes to sort it

    Reply
    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      May 16, 2022

      What does the community of enlightened, civilised, democratic, rule-of-law nations say though?

      Reply
  12. Nigl
    May 15, 2022

    And in related news the Observer is saying that Boris is backing down in his threats to scrap the NI protocol seeking the broadest consensus. Hasn’t HMG been doing that for years? Liz Truss, prepare to have the carpet pulled.

    Get ready for a meaningless Boris announcement. Boris backing down. Who would have thought it?

    Reply
    1. turboterrier
      May 15, 2022

      Nig1
      Prepare to have the carpet pulled?
      More likely having the trap she is standing on with the rope in position sprung.
      Good way of getting rid of competitors.

      Reply
      1. Mark B
        May 15, 2022

        turboterrier]

        I keep seeing the same picture with Alexander Johnson. As soon as there is a threat to his Premiership from a rival he hands them a Poisoned Chalice to sup from. And the damned overly ambitious fools take great golps full.

        If Truss was smart she would demand that Johnson either back her or sack her (eg Lord Frost). If he sacks her he will lose any respect and trust MP’s have and if he backs her, she has won as she is shown that she is someone of principle and courage, putting the UK first.

        Of course there is another option, and that is, just to do what she is told.

        Reply
  13. Bloke
    May 15, 2022

    Treaties tend to exist where a country cannot think for itself, or does not trust its corresponding neighbour(s) to behave in a mutually common interest. Marriage vows are similar.

    Sensible, honourable, loyal folk have and need freedom to choose what is right, and do not need binding laws or penalties to control their actions. The other party might if they did not trust them.

    Reply
  14. Donna
    May 15, 2022

    International Treaties are also very useful to the Establishment in general and Government which wish to absolve themselves of voter anger which they anticipate the issue will provoke. It’s so much easier to blame an International Organisation for implementing a policy than have to accept responsibility and any negative consequences.

    Various Governments exploited the EEC/EU Treaties in precisely this way; it was extremely convenient to blame Brussels when the basic fault lay with our own treacherous Establishment.

    After the appalling corruption the WHO has demonstrated over the Covid situation (I’m not calling it a pandemic, since it only qualified because the WHO changed the definition of one to suit themselves), there is no justification whatsoever for the UK to sign up to a Pandemic Treaty which would effectively give the WHO (and various un-elected, unaccountable individuals/organisations) complete control over this country every time they declare a pandemic.

    As we have seen over the past two years, the only western country which got its Covid policy right was Sweden …… using OUR Pandemic Plan which Johnson stupidly ditched in favour of copying Communist China. Sweden’s excess death rate was vastly better than ours (and most of western Europe) and it didn’t wreck the economy or ruin millions of schoolchildren’s education.

    The best policy, going forward, seems to be COPY SWEDEN (ie don’t ditch our Pandemic Plan).

    Reply
    1. BOF
      May 15, 2022

      +1 Donna

      Reply
    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      May 16, 2022

      Yes, copy Sweden and elect successive social democrat governments – damned good advice!

      Reply
      1. Peter2
        May 16, 2022

        We have NHL

        Reply
  15. Len Peel
    May 15, 2022

    Good man, you finally get that treaties can only be changed by agreement, never just by one side

    Reply
    1. a-tracy
      May 15, 2022

      Unless there are clauses in it Len for that very purpose.

      Reply
  16. matthu
    May 15, 2022

    We have already experienced how “Health & Safety” can be bent to impact almost every aspect of our lives. Now we are about to discover how health preparedness will be used to control us via the WHO which will no doubt also interpret climate change as the greatest threat to human health ever.

    Is anyone here prepared to argue that this would never lead to compulsory limitations on freedom to travel, freedom to control borders, freedom to choose what we put into our bodies or freedom of speech? All of these have already happened as a result of the fear induced by government reaction to Covid, so think how much easier it will be to put into place once it is all enforced by a global treaty.

    This is what world leaders have now started negotiating. Let’s hope that Boris sees the light.

    Reply
    1. matthu
      May 15, 2022

      As Bev Turner points out on GB News, freedom is like fresh air and clean water.
      You do not notice it until it is gone.

      Reply
  17. Brian Tomkinson
    May 15, 2022

    The WHO is currently preparing an international agreement on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response and I understand that the government is prepared to sign up to this proposed WHO Pandemic Treaty in the last week of this month.
    What will this treaty entail?
    What consultation has their been about this and its ramifications?
    Have you discussed/debated it in the House of Commons?
    Will any such treaty have precedence over our own Parliament?

    The public must be furnished with the full ramifications of what and how any pandemic treaty could affect them and be given a public vote on whether the UK should sign up, before the UK Government signs up to this.

    During the last two years our liberty and freedom were severely curtailed by the Government and supported by MPs, even though in certain prominent cases those restrictions, rules and laws were ignored by those who set them.
    Presumably that was because they knew that they weren’t actually necessary to control a virus but convenient for controlling people’s activities and behaviour?

    Are we in future to be told what we can and cannot do by the WHO?
    Our democracy is reeling after recent events, is this another step towards its elimination and passing power to a global elite?
    We expect those who purport to represent us to protect our rights, not undermine them.
    MPs are meant to serve us, not we serving them.

    Reply
  18. Philip P.
    May 15, 2022

    You can withdraw from a treaty by accusing another signatory of violating it. This is what the US did in 2019 with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) with Russia. The Russians, it was claimed, had deployed cruise missiles contrary to the terms of the INF.

    The Americans did not feel there was a need to have their claim corroborated by an independent international authority. They asked their NATO allies if the Russians had violated the treaty, and sure enough they said they had.

    I don’t see why we can’t do something similar with the Northern Ireland protocol if we consider, unilaterally, that the EU has not kept its part of the bargain.

    Reply
    1. Brearley
      May 15, 2022

      No, you have to use the procedures foreseen by the Treaty. You cannot do it unilaterally (as government lawyers are telling Ms Truss)

      Reply
      1. Philip P.
        May 15, 2022

        Yes, Brearley, the procedure foreseen by the NIP is in Article 16, which ‘sets out the process for taking unilateral “safeguard” measures if either the EU or UK concludes that the deal is leading to serious practical problems or causing diversion of trade. Those safeguards would amount to suspending parts of the deal.’ (BBC 13th May)
        The BBC says that lawyers are advising Liz Truss that this can be lawfully used to scrap contentious parts of the NIP. Let’s hope this will work, if the political will is there.

        Reply
  19. Everhopeful
    May 15, 2022

    Who owns these supra national bodies? In whose pocket do they reside?
    The U.K. knows that organisational capture has taken place by people whose values are inimical to our own.
    Has Johnson thought this through?
    He got caught ( as did others) the last time…but only by us and our owned press.
    Will he not be subject to the rules imposed for the next pandemic? AND THE PENALTIES?
    Has he seen what is happening in China?

    Reply
  20. Everhopeful
    May 15, 2022

    The controlled demolition of the Free West.
    Brought to you by our compromised leaders.

    Reply
    1. BOF
      May 15, 2022

      +1 E h. Summed up in brevity.

      Reply
    2. Mark B
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Reply
  21. Richard1
    May 15, 2022

    Indeed the WHO treaty looks very worrying. Excellent article by Matt Ridley on this topic in todays telegraph. It looks like trump was right – we need an alternative organisation to the WTO which it seems is hopelessly compromised by the Chinese communist party. According to Ridley, the WHO’s treaty doesn’t include a commitment to lab safety or transparency! The govt should announce that the U.K. will have no part in it unless transparency and lab safety are at the top of the list of objectives, and there is a comprehensive investigation of the cause of covid 19 as a result. Fortunately the US Congress will also take this view.

    Reply
  22. Iain Moore
    May 15, 2022

    This has been a bugbear of mine , one must presume politicians climb the greasy pole to be able to enact change, but then sign away the powers to do just that. I suppose it is evidence of a political class who really aren’t up to the job, they are there as result of a PPE degree, time as a Spad, then MP, being driven by some cause is not really evident, it is a career path, and if they can off load some of the pitfalls that may upset their career , well that would seem a sensible move.

    What I find somewhat incredible is lack of any lessons learned from Brexit , here the public made it very clear they were not happy with Westminster offloading so much of our sovereignty , yet they carry on signing away sovereignty as if nothing had happened, even when they under the cosh from results of some treaty signing by a past Government that is giving them nightmares, like the Refugee Convention, they still go on and do it themselves.

    Reply
  23. Dave Andrews
    May 15, 2022

    It does irritate me when I hear commentators claiming that for us to break the NI protocol, for example, would be breaking international law.
    There is no international law that binds a sovereign nation, otherwise it is no longer sovereign.
    Breaking treaties might undermine trust, but I think when it comes to the flawed Brexit agreement, that argument is over egged.

    Reply
  24. Lifelogic
    May 15, 2022

    If the EU is stupid enough to retaliate over the NI Protocol, it will mainly be hurting itself
    Britain is in a much stronger position than when we signed the treaty – we should call Brussels’s bluff

    Daniel Hannan today in the Sunday Telegraph – but the EU are probably stupid enough to retaliate, especially with Macron re-elected. He does not even seem that sound on Russia/Ukrain.

    Reply
    1. Denis Cooper
      May 15, 2022

      I would want to know what material harm we had done to them to possibly deserve any form of retaliation.

      If at some point in the future the Irish authorities found that since we had stopped checks at the sea border they were seeing lots more unacceptable goods coming in across the land border then they could have a case for some form of retaliatory action. But that hasn’t happened yet, even though for months now many of the EU checks demanded by the protocol have not been performed, having been unilaterally suspended by the UK government. Are they planning on getting their retaliation in first?

      Reply
  25. ChrisS
    May 15, 2022

    We are clearly addressing the consequences of Boris signing the Withdrawal Treaty.
    Thinking back, the mess left behind by Teresa May gave Boris little room for manoeuver and the EU correctly recognised that they had the upper hand in the negotiations.
    Had there been good will on both sides, a benign interpretation of the Protocol would have been a win-win all round, even given the fact that some checks on goods traversing the North Sea would be necessary.

    Unfortunately Brussels, egged on by Macron, decided to exploit the opportunity to its maximum extent and we now have the ludicrous situation of the EU demanding checks on all goods, not only those intended for Eire, but on those that are going no further than the supermarkets of NI. Furthermore, NI is prevented from producing goods that are intended for sale in the rest of the UK unless they fully comply with EU standards.

    The only commmon sense solution is electronic surveillance and clear labelling of goods only intended for sale in the UK. What possible objection could any reasonable trading partner have to this common sense solution ?

    I am not sure of the legality of putting through domestic legislation to unilaterally suspend parts of the Protocol/ However, we do have a perfectly legal route available through Article 16 which was written into the withdrawal agreement for exactly the circumstances we are faced with. Invoking A16 could not result in any accusation of breaking International law and would result in further negotiation and if that fails, independent arbitration. Is the latter what the government is afraid of ?

    Reply
  26. SecretPeople
    May 15, 2022

    >I do not think it would be a good idea to sign a binding Treaty designed by the World Health Organisation based on the current level of pandemic knowledge.

    I’m glad to see you now recognise the fact of this treaty, Sir John.

    Neil Oliver spoke very well on the subject recently – like him, if this treaty comes to pass, I will simply ignore the imposition of rules formulated by an unelected supra-governmental body. Sovereignty lies with the people and is merely lent to our representatives; it is not within their gift to give that power and those rights away to others with dubious motives.

    Reply
    1. Donna
      May 15, 2022

      Same here. I won’t be taking any notice of WHO rules, regulations or advice. (Although to be fair, I didn’t take too much notice of SAGE/Johnson’s either since they were obviously nonsense – as subsequently confirmed by the fact that they didn’t either).

      Reply
      1. Fedupsoutherner
        May 15, 2022

        Donna and Secret people. I’m with you both. There is NO way I’m having further boosters.

        Reply
        1. BeebTax
          May 15, 2022

          +1. No way I or my partner are getting boosters, we were duped first time around but never again.

          Reply
      2. beresford
        May 15, 2022

        How will you ignore the police who are enforcing these laws? Remember that in some parts of the world people were being rounded up and forcibly injected, and detention camps were built (but not used) for the unjabbed. Remember we were only saved from this fate because a few brave politicians broke the united front, and internet sites which they are now trying to crack down on allowed the propagation and discussion of so-called ‘disinformation’. Only a few months ago ‘celebrities’ were calling for the ostracism of those who wouldn’t submit to State medical interventions.

        Reply
        1. Fedupsoutherner
          May 15, 2022

          Beresford. If enough of us stick to our guns we have a chance. Look at how they had to back down with the NHS workers who refused to be vaccinated.

          Reply
  27. Atlas
    May 15, 2022

    Agreed Sir John.

    It is exactly what the opening credits of ‘Yes Prime Minister shows’ – a surfeit of Red Tape, except of an International type, not just a Sir Humphrey, civil-service, type.

    I have serious doubts about the proposed WHO treaty – like others replying on this posting.

    Reply
  28. BeebTax
    May 15, 2022

    I’m so glad to hear your soundly-argued views on this. Spot on, the WHO Pandemic Treaty would be a sellout and a disaster for our freedoms. It brings to mind the Orwellian image of a jackboot on your face, forever.

    Russell Brand a couple of days ago reminded people of the etymology of the word “fascist”: sticks, bound together so tightly you can’t pull them apart and impossible to break. International treaties these days are not about solidarity and doing good, they are about furthering the authoritarian ambitions of the powerful.

    Reply
  29. Original Richard
    May 15, 2022

    “The U.K. has signed too many Treaties in my life so far.”

    The worst examples being the ICCPR so that we cannot deport dangerous criminals, the UN’s Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and REGULAR Migration (CGM) to destroy our culture and social cohesion and then the climate change treaties designed to destroy our economy by unilaterally attempting to zero our 1% contribution to man-made CO2 emissions based upon the scam that a 0.15 degrees C/DECADE rise in global temperatures is a crisis.

    Reply
    1. Mark B
      May 15, 2022

      +1

      Plus all the EU stuff. Giving away sovereignty bit-by-bit.

      Reply
  30. Jason
    May 15, 2022

    When the troops marched past the old woman was heard to say – “they are all out of step except my son John”

    Reply
  31. Narrow Shoulders
    May 15, 2022

    Most countries sign up to international treaties knowing that they will only adhere to the bits that are advantageous to them (0.7% international aid [ and the definition of international aid]), refugee treaties, 2% NATO contribution, EU trading rules).

    The Head Boy mentality of our Civil Service, must apply all the rules in a manner that was not only unintended but is also disadvantageous to the UK. “Look at me Sir!”

    We need to become more self interested or not sign up.

    Reply
    1. a-tracy
      May 15, 2022

      NS yes I agree. Telegraph 7 Apr 2002 — FRANCE has the worst record of all European countries for flouting European Union regulations and failing to implement community directives,

      Reply
  32. Denis Cooper
    May 15, 2022

    Also off topic, another letter to a newspaper in Northern Ireland:

    “While Boris Johnson is in Belfast perhaps somebody could ask him this simple question.

    How does he, with his “friends and partners” in the EU, propose to guarantee that locally produced goods taken across the land border into the Irish Republic will comply with EU requirements?

    Obviously those exports will not be subject to any EU checks and controls applied to imported goods at the points of entry into the province, so what will be the alternative system for EU control?

    Might that involve checks carried out at sites away from any border, sea or land, and if so why could not the same be done for EU checks on all exports to the Republic and the EU Single Market?”

    Reply
  33. a-tracy
    May 15, 2022

    Don’t you think that the biggest problem is that we Brits like to follow rules, get in line, accept the punishments like fees and fines and grumble to ourselves until it becomes unbearable the injustice of it.

    Other’s like France and Germany just overturn the rules at will and don’t see to get the same fines. France just ignores the UN and leaves immigrants in tents under road passes and in mud at Calais or lets them live in office blocks with minimal toilets and no bathrooms, the UN tuts but turns a blind eye. Germany breaks rule after rule (emissions just one example) and who bothers to take issue with them? It seems no-one. When they wanted to overturn the PPE rules at the start of the ‘covid crisis’ they just broke all the rules.

    Reply
    1. R.Grange
      May 15, 2022

      Absolutely agree, a-tracy. Just one point, though: at the start of the Covid crisis, there weren’t any ‘PPE rules’. There was just a recommendation by the likes of Anthony Fauci (still online) and other ‘experts’ not to bother with wearing a face-mask as it didn’t help much against a virus. Then, once Chinese companies and their UK import agents had produced hundreds of millions of masks to sell us, the tune suddenly changed and the same ‘experts’ were now telling us how medically essential it was to wear one! All just Covid theatre. God forbid we ever go down that road again.

      Reply
      1. a-tracy
        May 16, 2022

        R.G I meant 6 Mar 2020 — Germany and France have been condemned by other EU members after blocking the export of medical supplies to shore up supplies in their countries. Then Brussels joined in ’15 Mar 2020 — Brussels on Sunday imposed an EU-wide export ban for some medical protective equipment in a bid to keep sufficient supplies within the bloc’. This is on contracts that were previously all signed. So contracts in the bloc could be bent and overturned when it suits them.

        This is why essential equipment has to be provided at home or sufficient stocks for emergencies – J Hunt MP failed on that planning and the companies he gave contracts to failed and ‘lost’ stock.

        Reply
    2. Fedupsoutherner
      May 15, 2022

      ATracy. Spain is the same. We had no drinkable water for over 5 years. No health and safety rules adhered to on the building sites.

      Reply
  34. BOF
    May 15, 2022

    Well Sir John, the best ideas were already incorporated in the UK plan for a pandemic but these were scuttled in favour of lock down, masks and vaccines on the advice of WHO! The UK plan was followed by Sweden, successfully.
    The WHO plan failed. Masks do not work, lockdowns have failed and the vaccines have not just failed but are causing great harm and death.

    Now WHO wish to gain control of world policy on pandemics and enforce their failed policies!

    That this would even be considered is insane. Should it happen I for one would never comply. Gaol would be preferable.

    Reply
    1. BOF
      May 15, 2022

      To add to my comment above. We are on the way to having our freedom to peaceful protest and freedom of speech seriously curtailed so I would say that under this dictatorial government, signing up to the WHO pandemic treaty will be a formality!

      Reply
      1. Everhopeful
        May 15, 2022

        +1
        Absolutely spot on.
        Hog tied!

        Reply
  35. a-tracy
    May 15, 2022

    Why when your government has a near 80 seat majority don’t you just immediately take the 5% VAT of Domestic heating. If Northern Ireland can’t have it because it’s tied into the single market so be it but reduce their vat back down to 17.5% or match their corporation tax rate to Ireland and give them a perk in lieu that you can do in the Single Market. We play with too straight a bat and the EU don’t. Boris needs to earn back his respect and forgiveness and he needs to do this by helping the people on the promises he made them.

    Reply
  36. acorn
    May 15, 2022

    Did you know, the UK is signed up to about 15,000 international Treaties. It also has 292,000 pieces of legislation, in 27 different categories. 124,000 of them are Regulations originating from the EU and directly implemented in the UK legislature using the powers in the 1972 Act. Hopefully, you have all read our glorious leader’s version of fantasy brexit by now https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1054643/benefits-of-brexit.pdf

    Reply
    1. Peter2
      May 15, 2022

      Tell NHL
      He has been claiming the EU hardly affected the UK with legislation or directives or regulations.
      Just 124,000 regulation you say acorn

      Reply
  37. Denis Cooper
    May 15, 2022

    Off topic again, having read Tim Shipman’s article in the Sunday Times:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/liz-truss-was-sent-to-stop-a-trade-war-now-no-10-fears-she-could-start-one-hxsgll3dr

    “Liz Truss was sent to stop a trade war — now No 10 fears she could start one”

    I shall of course wait and see if anything actually happens tomorrow or on Tuesday, but for now I would ask whether the trailed plan to impose higher penalties on firms who break the rules and “smuggle” goods from Northern Ireland into the Irish Republic will include making it an offence under UK law to take across goods which do not comply with EU standards, as envisaged in the Command Paper last July.

    http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2022/05/13/home-ownership-and-house-prices/#comment-1318531

    “… EU checks and controls could be just on goods intended to cross the land border into the Irish Republic and they could be performed at sites well away from the border. Which will have to be done anyway, for goods produced in the province rather than brought in from outside. It is a very strange and not very neighbourly thing that at present it is not even an offence under UK law to take across goods which do not comply with EU standards, the new laws envisaged last July not having been passed”

    Reply
  38. Original Richard
    May 15, 2022

    The signing of a WHO treaty (or accord) will guarantee the release of another Covid type virus.

    It’s the start of a world government using both personal health and planet saving scams to frighten people into submission.

    Reply
  39. Old Salt
    May 15, 2022

    Regarding the NIP surely the issue lies with EU regulation requiring checks on its external border therefore its up to them so to do notwithstanding the GFA.

    I read UK has already spent over £100m in infrastructure cost to enable checks let alone costs and disruption to business and public alike.

    Seems EU plan all along to thwart Brexit with as one Martin Selmayr was alleged to say “The price the UK would have to pay would be the loss of Northern Ireland”.

    Reply
  40. Your comment is awaiting moderation
    May 15, 2022

    Delegating power to corrupt organisations such as the WHO is something that should be forbidden.
    We can share information internationally and cooperate with other countries but under no circumstances should the British government delegate sovereignty ever again.

    Reply
    1. ChrisS
      May 15, 2022

      Please note that I did not post this contribution so I would like to know how it has been credited to me.

      Chris S

      reply It was posted as received

      Reply
  41. Barbara
    May 15, 2022

    The news that Gordon Brown has been appointed WHO Ambassador for Global Health Finance does not inspire confidence.

    Reply
    1. Donna
      May 15, 2022

      I guess “saving the world” once isn’t enough for Mr No More Boom and Bust.

      What could possibly go wrong?

      Reply
  42. Mark Thomas
    May 15, 2022

    Sir John,
    It has been clear for many years that any Prime Minister of the UK when presented with an international treaty will ask “where do I sign? ” The only complaint from the opposition is that they are not able to sign it.

    The idea of signing a binding International Treaty with the CCP sponsored World Health Organisation is anathema to many people. I am one of them but as in all these matters I feel powerless.

    All I can do is sign the petition.

    Reply
  43. Mark Thomas
    May 15, 2022

    Regarding the Maastricht Treaty, the only reason you were able to secure an exit clause from the EU is because it was thought impossible that anyone would ever want to leave.

    Reply
  44. anon
    May 15, 2022

    Change UK law. So that treaties are therefore subject to referenda. They all should have exit clauses with no penalties. Perhaps they should lapse automatically. They should roll-over only if they are included in manifesto at the time of each election.

    MP’s amending laws to thwart this should be forced to hold by-elections to ensure they have legitimate backing.

    Lets have elections for our Prime Minister and separate the executive from parliament.
    Scrap the House of Lords – replace it with non voting working groups.

    Reply
  45. Sea_Warrior
    May 15, 2022

    Wild clapping from me. Perhaps you could put some pointed questions to the government about why it wants to get the UK involved in a war on the Finnish-Russo border? Should I assume that Boris is after some filler for his autobiography?

    Reply
    1. Hat man
      May 15, 2022

      S_W: I think I know why it wants to get the UK involved in a war between Finland and Russia. It’s because there were people like yourself clapping wildly when Johnson got the UK involved in war between Ukraine and Russia. Politicians love popularity above all. As long as opposing Russia’s security interests continues to be popular in this country, the government will keep going on its course towards a hot war.

      Reply
  46. Ian Pennell
    May 15, 2022

    Dear Sir John Redwood

    The Northern Ireland Protocol was desisned by the European Union to effectively annexe Northern Ireland from Great Britain. This was a punishment for Brexit and Boris Johnson was – effectively- forced to agree to it because of a Remainer Majority in Parliament who weakened the Government’s negotiating position by getting laws passed to outlaw a No Deal Brexit (helped by the former Remainer Speaker, John Bercow)! The only way Boris Johnson could then “Get to the 2019 Election” to get that majority to Get Brexit Done was by agreeing to the rubbish Deal the EU offered, the Opposition was not going to allow an Election until this happened, so as to “Prevent a No Deal Brexit”!

    Now, we are where we are. Boris Johnson agreed to the effective annexation of Northern Ireland under duress. That ought, morally, to be grounds to overrule it. However, the EU threaten tariffs if Boris Johnson unilaterally overrules any part of the Northern Ireland Protocol, and the EU are getting their more powerful Henchmen the Democrat run USA Government to threaten “No USA Trade Deal…Instead there May be Tariffs”. Given the Economic crises affecting Britain at present- with rising Inflation and the threat of Recession- Boris Johnson will be under extreme pressure to accede to the EU and USA demands “Not To Rip Up The Northern Ireland Protocol”, even though the EU is using it to cause economic problems and to pressurise Northern Ireland in joining up with the Irish Republic.

    I have no hope that Boris Johnson will not back down, sadly he is already showing signs of doing so! The British Government is allowing the EU and their Democrat-controlled USA Henchmen to threaten Britain- unless they affectively give up part of their territory. Of course, they are not doing this by threatening bombs and guns but through ecoomic pressure- but its still, effectively, war to get a country to -in effect- cede control of part of its territory to another hostile entity. Lets Call It Out for what it is!

    In the meantime, Sir, you must get Boris Johnson to stand up to the EU, stand up to the USA in the face of their threats. Let’s just concentrate on strengthening economic ties with the Commonwealth and Israel (whom I believe are God’s people and another country bullied by the USA into being nice to hostile groups and nations around them). Britain will never get a better deal if She does not stand up to the Big Bullies.

    If Boris Johnson caves over this then you MUST move with haste and get your Conservative colleagues to get him replaced- very much ASAP. Boris Johnson is irreparably damaged by Partygate, is now an electoral liability and the Conservatives need to clear out the bad apples too to save the Party from electoral defeat. There’s no way the Conservatives will win the next Election if the Conservative Leadership is not only seen by most voters as lying, sleazy and incompetent on the economy- and also develops a reputation for cowardice and appeasement!

    Reply
    1. Denis Cooper
      May 15, 2022

      According to the EU removal of tariffs and quotas through the Trade and Co-operation Agreement will benefit the UK economy by about 0.75% of GDP. Five UK government departments were unable or unwilling to tell me how much they thought the deal was worth to the UK, but the EU figure is reasonable. The deal is worth more to the EU countries in absolute terms, but less as a percentage of their collective GDP. Contrary to the wrong idea being casually promoted by some in the media the UK would not be obliged to impose reciprocal tariffs, if the EU was stupid enough to reimpose its previous tariffs when it had not actually suffered any material harm, and I think there would also be a strong case for the UK government to launch a “Buy British” campaign.

      Reply
      1. acorn
        May 15, 2022

        Are you aware that both the UK and the EU registered post Brexit tariff schedules with the WTO. If the TCA, which, as FTA go, isn’t actually worth a lot more than those basic WTO schedules; was revoked, then both sides would revert to those WTO schedules as per the Treaty. If the UK revokes the N.I. Protocol, then all bets are off.

        Reply
        1. Denis Cooper
          May 16, 2022

          Yes, I am aware of that, and I also recall previous discussions such as this nearly three years ago:

          http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2019/06/15/remain-does-not-do-democracy-they-just-assert-they-know-better-than-the-people/#comment-1029818

          “There was a long discussion around this nearly a year ago, starting with this comment from Caterpillar … ”

          It doesn’t alter the low overall economic impact of tariffs, 0.75% of GDP according to the EU.

          You say “if the UK revokes the N.I. Protocol, then all bets are off”, but that contradicts what you say about reverting to WTO schedules which would be under the continuing WTO treaties, which would not be off and which prohibit arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination.

          Reply
  47. Christine
    May 15, 2022

    I’m glad you are raising this problem whereby governments’ are bypassing the democratic process to give away our sovereignty to non-elected bodies. This situation is totally wrong and the ERG must put pressure on Boris to not sign this WHO treaty. We voted to take back control from the unelected EU. Why would Boris enter into another pact giving away sovereignty regarding our health? I’m sick to death of other people dictating how I live my life and through propaganda putting the fear of God into easily manipulated people to coerce them into giving up their freedom.

    Please keep a close eye on the meeting of the World Health Assembly at the end of May where the pandemic pact is being discussed. The WHO behaved terribly during the pandemic and obfuscated the origin of Covid. I don’t want them anywhere near the decision-making process that affects my life.

    Good coverage from Matt Ridley and Neil Oliver if people want to hear more about this subject.

    I know petitions don’t do much good but at least they get the topic in question some publicity so please can all readers against Boris signing this pact without the peoples’ or parliament’s consent please sign:

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/614335

    Reply
    1. Denis Cooper
      May 15, 2022

      Thanks, I’ve just signed it.

      Reply
    2. Old Salt
      May 15, 2022

      Did I not hear the WHO treaty has already been signed? If so when was it democratically discussed in Parliament?

      Reply
      1. Clough
        May 15, 2022

        No, Old Salt, it hasn’t been signed. The draft text won’t appear till August, I read somewhere. Its backers hope to get it endorsed by 2024, from what I recall. So there’s plenty of time for SJR and others who’ve been alerted to the danger to make their voices heard.

        Reply
      2. Diane
        May 15, 2022

        O S: The treaty is not due to be finalised until 2024 I understand.
        The petition 614335 in the last 60 minutes has gathered in excess of 1170 signatures & increasing by the minute ( Yes I’m a bit of a nerd ) – on its way to 100.000 when it may be considered for debate.

        Reply
    3. DOM
      May 15, 2022

      A US-Chinese stitch up now that both nations have MARXISTS in charge. Of course this power grab will be smashed if Trump or De Santis become the next POTUS

      Reply
  48. hefner
    May 15, 2022

    An interesting but not much commented on sentence in the news on 08/05/2022:
    ‘The Prime Minister will host a meeting of arms companies later this month to discuss increasing production in response to the demand created by the conflict in Ukraine’.
    itv.com

    gov.uk ‘How defence contributes to the prosperity of the UK and supports the UK economy’, 12/04/2022

    Reply
    1. Everhopeful
      May 15, 2022

      +100
      Oh yes!
      What with all the virtue signalling and watching Johnson wincing through a rendition of the Ukrainian national anthem in Number 10….I’d quite forgotten how good we are at making arms.
      Well, there’s a thing!

      Reply
  49. Original Richard
    May 15, 2022

    A Parliament elected via a GE to be sovereign for the 5 years of its term does not have the right during this term to give away permanently the country’s sovereignty by signing an international treaty without a referendum.

    Reply
    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      May 15, 2022

      So where does it say that in any UK constitution?

      Reply
    2. Mark B
      May 15, 2022

      Agreed.

      Out of the EU frying pan and into the UN (WHO) fire.

      Reply
  50. Malcolm White
    May 15, 2022

    Dear Sir John,

    It has been bad enough in the past two years to be guided by the ‘science’ as determined by an unaccountable few in Whitehall who would not listen to, let alone consider, alternative points of view – much to the detriment of the economy and the lives of millions in the UK.

    The Covid-19 enquiry is underway, but I believe there’s sufficient evidence to show that lockdowns didn’t work, experimental vaccines were ineffective in containing the spread of the virus and in a large number of cases have proven harmful to individuals who were not personally at risk and draconian steps taken to force compliance and vaccination has seriously infringed individuals’ personal human rights to choose what they do with their bodies and how they live their lives.

    I understand that a working draft of the above treaty is due to be published in August 2022 and would thus expect that officials in our Government will likely be giving consideration to this ‘legally binding international treaty’ under the auspices of the World Health Organisation. An unelected, unaccountable body that would be given carte blanche to determine in what way future pandemics are handled. An organisation that is so politically aligned with China, that it wouldn’t accept that the original Covid-19 virus originated from Wuhan.

    Their claim is that they will be able to organise a single coordinated response. But what would that response be? Ask the EU how it was for them? They along with the UK and much of the western world employed a myriad of lockdowns and enforced vaccinations. Yet these weren’t overly effective in checking the spread of the virus or the excess mortality rate. Sweden, however, took a different view and did not enforce either. They apparently have reported fewer deaths per 100,000 population and haven’t tanked their economy.

    So how is it expected that the WHO will have greater insight and ability to determine the best way forward for all 192 or so nations that may be signatories to this? Let alone any type of speedy and co-ordinated action. It’s utter madness. It would be the first step in creating a world order. All done in the name of world health. But that’s where it all begins. One only has to look at our experience with the European Project to see how true that is.

    While not ideal, given our recent experience, an independent UK Government making decisions – hopefully more democratic and less partisan in determination in future – on our collective behalves is still preferable to that of an unelected, unaccountable body elsewhere in the world.

    Reply
  51. Denis Cooper
    May 15, 2022

    Apparently Lord Frost is like an old lag who seemed to be reformed but is slipping back into criminality.

    At 34:54 minutes in here:

    https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2022/0513/1297882-podcast-brexit-republic-maross-mandate/

    “And David Frost has been getting back to this idea of having checks near the Irish border, not on the Irish border, so there is a kind of recidivism there that is creeping in”

    Well, this is how I ended an email sent in the direction of Simon Coveney earlier today:

    “I wonder whether you and your colleagues in government still hold to the nonsensical view that at present there is no border, and also the equally nonsensical view that “any checks or controls anywhere on the island would constitute a hard border”, as revealed by Rory Montgomery; and given that comprehensive prohibition I would also be interested in your thoughts on where EU checks should be performed on any goods produced in Northern Ireland that are destined for export across the land border into the Republic and the EU Single Market. Clearly not at the points of entry, and clearly not at the land border, so where?”

    Reply
    1. Jack
      May 15, 2022

      There can be a buffer zone approx 10 miles wide stretching into the North where everything moving south can be stopped and checked. Alternatively goods from GB bound for NI can be routed through Dublin checked by EU officials and then driven up over the border ‘ no need to bother the customs officials at Belfast or Larne. Simple

      Reply
  52. Fedupsoutherner
    May 15, 2022

    O/T. It looks like we are going to run out of water in around 25 years. West Sussex has just been highlighted as water is becoming scarse. Unless developers can show they are not going to cause a problem with water supplies they cannot build. Quite frankly I’m not surprised as the amount of building in Sussex recently is totally bonkers. It was obvious there would be problems eventually. All the time we invite so many people in we are going to have problems of one sort or another. We will need one very large reservoir a week on top of what we have now or our use of water will be rationed. The future doesn’t look great but then many of us have been trying to highlight this problem with immigration for a long time.

    Reply
    1. turboterrier
      May 15, 2022

      F U S
      Developers, councils, county councils and politicians were told time and time again getting warned on a regular basis from the middle 70s. It’s nothing new the old London CC only allowed one potable water tap the rest of the outlets were all tank fed. Location location location sells house. Infrastructure, infrastructure Infrastructure is the things that keep them liveable.and serviceable.but why listen to utility companies.

      Reply
  53. Mark B
    May 15, 2022

    FUS

    They do not care. The plan is to make everything scarce and make people pay. That way people learn to moderate their consumption / behaviour.

    Everywhere you look, supply is being throttled back as profits can be maintained through scarcity. Governments don’t care as they can blame Climate Change etc whilst taking a cut through taxes.

    Reply
    1. Fedupsoutherner
      May 16, 2022

      Mark. Nail on head.

      Reply
  54. Geoffrey Berg
    May 15, 2022

    John Redwood here is certainly living up to the blog’s aspiration of ‘incisive’ commentary.
    The truth is international binding treaties are one of the means the educated, supposedly sophisticated establishment (political centre-left)have found to hugely reduce the scope of what can be decided by a country’s democracy. Another is subjecting legislation to the overriding ‘interpretations’ and veto of the unelected judiciary. The worst is the European Convention of Human Rights which combines judiciary and international and is subject to creative ‘development’ by the international judiciary far beyond what was the case when countries signed the Convention.
    In so many spheres important decisions are not decided by British democracy but by unelected officials, often foreign officials. So we are in effect told democracy does not apply to many important matters (e.g. whether to reintroduce capital punishment as much of the U.S.A. has done).
    We need up to date and proper analysis concerning democracy and a new settlement, possibly via a written Constitution concerning British democracy.

    Reply
  55. Lindsay McDougall
    May 16, 2022

    Nobody forces the UK to sign up to international treaties so it ought to be easy to disengage from those we don’t like. Why did we allow Lord Caradon in 1970 to sign the International Law on Treaties on behalf of the UK. If we hadn’t signed it, we would not have to treat the Good Friday Agreement as sancrosanct. And we would have found Brexit a lot easier. We are also guilty of writing targets such as zero carbon by 2050 into law. The Supreme Court has used that to attempt to veto construction of the third runway at Heathrow, on the grounds that the extra flights used to justify the third runway would render impossible the zero carbon target. And when oh when are we going to stop making free legal advice available to would be immigrants?

    Reply
    1. Diane
      May 16, 2022

      LM : And when oh when ….. Certainly not today judging by the numbers arrived over the weekend, plenty of opportunities for further applicants to dip into our pockets either before or after they get their letter. Saturday 167 on 13 boats. Yesterday 436 on 9 boats. Sickening.

      Reply
    2. Mark
      May 17, 2022

      Perhaps they should have pointed out that they would have no objection to permission were net zero repealed. If we get a list of such judgements it forms a large part of the basis for pursuing repeal.

      Reply
  56. Pauline Baxter
    May 16, 2022

    Thank you Sir John, for looking into the WHO’s attempt to steal our nation’s sovereignty.
    You have raised some very true objections to signing these international treaties. Particularly the point about one parliament binding a future parliament.
    We are still seeing just how near impossible it is to get free of the EU that we got into with such treaties.
    For heaven’s sake DO NOT LET YOUR GOVERNMENT SIGN THE WHO TREATY.
    Not even if they offer any supposed ‘opt outs’.
    We should never have trusted the EEC/EU.
    We certainly CAN NOT TRUST these Global Organisations.

    Reply
    1. TooleyStu
      May 18, 2022

      Fantastic wording.
      + 1 (million)

      Reply
  57. TooleyStu
    May 18, 2022

    *BIG WARNING*
    This week most of the countries of the world will sign up to W-H-O pandemic treaty.
    Once signed, the overall power in UK shifts to Geneva.
    Lock – Stock – The Whole Lot.
    ++
    The WHO (not the band who did Tommy and Substitute) will have the over reaching power to enforce any ‘medical’ power onto countries, governments and people.
    So, without a whimper, we are now at the mercy of the un-elected ‘Medical Elites’.
    ++
    Where was the debate?
    The permission?
    And how did UK hand over authority to a Foreign power without losing in war?

    Tooley Stu

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *