My Intervention on the Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response: International Agreement

John Redwood (Wok) (Con):
I am glad the hon. Gentleman agrees that we needed better parliamentary scrutiny and more options for the handling of the pandemic but, given that that is the case, how on earth does it make sense to give away powers to an international quango, which will then instruct future Ministers to do these things, with Parliament being told that it has no right to talk about it or to vote on it?

Justin Madders:
If that was how it was going to proceed, I would agree with the right hon. Gentleman, but I do not believe that is the case. Any Government Member concerned about parliamentary sovereignty and scrutiny would not have voted for the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, which has put thousands of laws into the hands of Ministers without any parliamentary accountability.

29 Comments

  1. Peter
    April 18, 2023

    The first sentence of the reply does not need the caveat -ā€˜if that was how it was going to proceed.

    He does not know what is going to happen.

    As for EU retained law, we already know that the government has delayed rectifying this issue. We will still have retained EU law for some time to come. I suspect many in government hope voters will forget about this.

  2. glen cullen
    April 18, 2023

    SirJ, plain & simple, you didn’t get an answer

    1. Wanderer
      April 19, 2023

      +1 GC. He just referred to other legislation.

      They obviously are determined to give away our sovereignty. The WHO plan to have the power to force us to spend vast sums of money on whatever measures they deem necessary in a pandemic. Truly vast sums. Was it up to 5% of our GDP? See TCW yesterday.

  3. Bryan Harris
    April 18, 2023

    Justin Madders:
    If that was how it was going to proceed, I would agree with the right hon. Gentleman, but I do not believe that is the case. Any Government Member concerned about parliamentary sovereignty and scrutiny would not have voted for the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, which has put thousands of laws into the hands of Ministers without any parliamentary accountability.

    He must be blind if he cannot see how this will truly proceed. Once again our host is spot on, but those that would just sign away our rights without real consideration are just too keen for the globalists to take over – I wonder why – What’s in it for them?

    1. graham1946
      April 19, 2023

      Less responsibility and work as a minimum. What else, we can only speculate. That Ministers can be so doe eyed and naive about this sort of thing suggests they are either unfit for their office (my preference) or they have some axe to grind of their own. Non answers from government seem to be the norm of the day with this government, clueless or devious – you decide.

  4. rose
    April 18, 2023

    How many MPs and Peers would you say assert that it is undemocratic to get rid of thousands of EU laws that were imposed on us unscrutinised and undebated, either by the EU Parliament or by ours?

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      April 18, 2023

      Pardon?

      1. graham1946
        April 19, 2023

        It’s a simple enough question.

        1. hefner
          April 21, 2023

          But a ridiculous one, simply showing roseā€™s ignorance of all things EU ?
          See commission.europa.eu ā€˜Adopting EU lawā€™; europarl.europa.eu ā€˜Legislative powersā€™; consilium.europa.eu ā€˜The ordinary legislative procedureā€™.

  5. a-tracy
    April 18, 2023

    Justin Madders (Lab) E’Port & Neston. Shadow Minister for Employment Rights of the United Kingdom.

    Why is he answering questions on health?

    And, “Any Government Member concerned about parliamentary sovereignty and scrutiny would not have voted for the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill”?

    I don’t understand. I thought that was the point we are not retaining all EU laws. Did Justin Madders vote for or against this bill?

    1. graham1946
      April 19, 2023

      Didn’t know that, thought he was minister as he was answering. As he isn’t, presumably his answer is as worthless as it seems and needs to be put to the government for a non answer. They are all the same by the looks of it.

  6. Cuibono
    April 18, 2023

    JR ā€¦you are star! ā­ļø
    And now we know that Labour definitely has no care for what remains of our sovereignty!

  7. Ian B
    April 18, 2023

    Lame response, “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear” – syndrome, That misses the point, is the UK a Parliamentary Democracy?

    If the Minister believes what he is saying he should resign, we have no need for a Parliament of MPā€™s under his thought process ā€“ some one will always tell him what to do. He is also saying the members of the HoC are not fit people to carry out what is best for the UK and its People

    1. Bloke
      April 19, 2023

      Those ā€˜thousands of laws going into the hands of Ministersā€™ can be sorted more safely there than left in the grip of an EU fist.
      Some EU laws were sensible, some crazy. The UK supported the ones our MEPs approved at the time. The ones we wanted rejected were enforced by others.
      Opening every detail to parliamentary debate is wastefully beyond reach. Governing Ministers each know their own Deptā€™s priorities in todayā€™s situation, and can focus on changing the unwanted EU laws into what we now need. Many daft old EU diktats need dumping anyway.

  8. Berkshire Alan
    April 18, 2023

    What sort of answer is that !

    Am I reading this correctly ?

    Is he saying, two wrongs do not make it right, but to hell with it anyway ?

    Is he saying, you are all fools because you have done it before, so it does not matter ?

  9. Your comment is awaiting moderation
    April 18, 2023

    If the Tories want to hand governence of our country to supranational organisations then they should have said so in their election manifesto.

  10. Sakara Gold
    April 18, 2023

    The government’s mismanagement of the Chinese plague virus crisis resulted in ~185,000 of His Majesty’s subjects having ‘Covid19’ written on their death certificates by their GPs. The results of Johnson’s refusal to follow his own goverment’s advice resulted in him losing his job in the Partygate controversy, not to mention Hancock and Harding blowing Ā£37billions on the totally ineffectual Test and Trace. Or the Ā£11billion furlough money paid out to fraudsters by the Treasury without any oversight – while Sunak was Chancellor.

    Clearly, next time round we should follow WHO recommendations to the letter

    1. Hat man
      April 19, 2023

      Sakara, a FOI request last year found that of 175,000 ‘Covid deaths’, only about 17,000 had only Covid on the death certificate. All the rest had one or more serious medical condition. GPs wrote ‘Covid’ on the death certificate because they were informed of a positive test result in the 30 or 60 days prior to death. That is not a medical examination, far less an autopsy identifying the cause of death.

      It is disappointing that you apparently need to be reminded of this .

    2. Donna
      April 19, 2023

      The 185,000 figure includes those who tested positive for Covid within the 2 weeks prior to their death. Since the vast majority were already very elderly and frail, or had serious co-morbidities, it has already been admitted that many of them died WITH Covid, not OF it.

      And – sadly – many of them were already in the last chance saloon and would have died within a very short period anyway.

      The statistics include a man who had tested positive and was quarantining but wasn’t ill, so he decided to do some DIY. He fell off his ladder and broke his neck: that was recorded as a Covid death!

    3. a-tracy
      April 19, 2023

      SK. Perhaps the UK just needed to change the reporting to died of covid19 not with covid19.
      There were many people in the UK wanting so much free test and trace, from the whole public sector workforce, bus drivers, everyone wanted their free tests this all costs money. The trace systems were weak and poorly delivered but the test part of the process was very successful and in my opinion lasted too long after all of the vaccinations were seen to be working in reducing severity. Just look as fast it has stopped when people had to start paying for them.

  11. hefner
    April 18, 2023

    Well done Justin, time to show the hypocrisy of some MPs only there to play to their imagined gallery and cosy up to what they dream up their Conservative electorate is thinking.

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      April 18, 2023

      Yes, he nailed it in one.

    2. Martin in Bristol
      April 18, 2023

      Translation of Hefners post is
      MP who try to be popular with their electorate.

  12. Christine
    April 18, 2023

    This is a power grab by the WHO and our MPs don’t even seem to be aware of the implications of the the treaty our government is signing, yet 156,000 members of the public are so worried about it they have forced this parliamentary debate. Why are so many of our MPs so out of touch and spending their time on woke nonsense when major issues like this are being forced upon us without our consent? Only a handful of MPs seem in the least bit concerned and once again Andrew Bridgen tries to educate them to the dangers but he gets his speeches banned by the media. The global elites really have taken over democracy in our country. Shame on our elected representatives.

    1. a-tracy
      April 19, 2023

      I wonder if it is those same MPs who were concerned about the N Ireland sell out and were told “it will be alright we’ll sort it out later”! when it wasn’t and won’t be.

  13. […] My Intervention on the Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response: International Agreement […]

    1. Christine
      April 19, 2023

      Yes, you and a few others opposed it but there are not enough of you. Our government intend to sign this transfer of sovereignty without any parliamentary debate. Something is sadly wrong with our political leaders. Penny Mordaunt actually said the WHO proposals were a good thing when Andrew Bridgen raised it with her. She either hasn’t read it or is being given something in return for her approval. No transfer of power or sovereignty should ever be part of an international treaty. Sovereignty belongs to the people not politicians.

  14. Donna
    April 19, 2023

    Justin Madders nicely demonstrates the Labour Party Remainers’ continuing obsession with a democratic vote to leave the EU.

    The point …. which he decided to ignore ….. is that Parliament FAILED to do its job and scrutinise the Executive’s handling of the Covid Scamdemic. It meekly accepted all the lunatic restrictions when, if there had been more questioning of their justification and the likely consequences, the economy might not have been wrecked; a generation would not have had their education destroyed; thousands of lives would not have been wrecked ….. and many highly vulnerable children might still be alive.

    The WHO’s proposed power-grab would make even the ability to challenge the Orders they were issuing impossible, or present scientific arguments countering them.

    It’s a Dictator’s Charter.

  15. Mark
    April 19, 2023

    Madders speaks as if putting laws into the hands of ministers with no Parliamentary oversight is a good thing. It has proved an unqualified disaster. It means that voters no longer retain the ability to vote out governments that pass inimical laws, because the laws are drafted by civil servants and decreed by ministers in a complete democracy bypass.

Comments are closed.