Great Reset
Leslyn Lewis warns WHO pandemic treaty amendments violate Canadian sovereignty

From LifeSiteNews
The WHO amendments were adopted despite thousands of Canadians appealing for their rejection.
Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis has blasted that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) new International Health Regulations (IHR), warning they will compromise Canada’s sovereignty.
On December 19, Dr. Leslyn Lewis, Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) for Haldimand-Norfolk, Ontario, condemned Health Minister Mark Holland for failing to protect Canada’s sovereignty by consenting to pandemic amendments put forward by the WHO, which give the international organization increased power over Canadians.
“Canada consented to the amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations (IHR), which limits Canada’s time to respond to further amendments, despite thousands of Canadians signing a petition expressing their concerns,” Lewis wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Canada consented to the amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations (IHR), which limits Canada’s time to respond to further amendments, despite thousands of Canadians signing a petition expressing their concerns.
See my letter below outlining why the response to… pic.twitter.com/1AZ63ebHX3
— Dr. Leslyn Lewis (@LeslynLewis) December 19, 2023
In October, Lewis endorsed a petition demanding the Liberal government under the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “urgently” withdraw from the United Nations and its subgroup, the World Health Organization (WHO), due to the organizations’ undermining of national “sovereignty” and the “personal autonomy” of citizens.
The petition was signed by nearly 19,000 Canadians despite only being open for 30 days. It warned that the “secretly negotiated” amendments could “impose unacceptable, intrusive universal surveillance, violating the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”
However, despite Canadians’ concerns, the Trudeau government adopted the amendments proposed by the WHO. The new amendments reduce the time for “rejecting any future amendments to the IHR (2005) from 18 months to 10 months” and “implementing future changes into Canadian domestic law from 24 months to 12 months.”
According to Lewis, the amendments alter the original treaty by failing to provide sufficient time for Canadians to consider changes to the agreement before they are scheduled to take effect.
Lewis further explained that the amendments were first presented at the 75th World Health Assembly in 2022 in violation of the IHR law which states, “The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four (4) months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration. ”
“Such amendments were illegitimately submitted and must therefore be regarded as null and void,” Lewis argued. “The question is, why were they not regarded as null and void by Canada?”
Lewis pointed out that the 10-month period “would not allow sufficient time for Canada to study and closely examine the 300+ amendments currently being considered by the IHR.”
“This period will be far too short to determine the scale of impacts of these proposed amendments on our domestic laws and the Canadian people,” she added.
“This period will also be far too short to have these amendments go through the parliamentary process and to conduct the necessary public consultations on changes that constitute binding rules on Canada’s response to health emergencies,” Lewis warned.
U.N.’s Agenda 2030 and the WEF’s ‘Great Reset’
The Trudeau government’s rejection of Canadians’ concerns and acceptance of the amendments should not come as a surprise considering Trudeau’s environmental goals which are in lockstep with the United Nations’ “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”
Agenda 2030 was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 2015. Through its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it seeks to “transform our world for the better,” by “taking urgent action on climate change,” as well as “support[ing] the research and development of vaccines and medicines.” Some of the 17 goals also seek to expand “reproductive” services, including contraception and abortion, across the world in the name of women’s rights.
According to the U.N., “all” nations working on the program “will implement this plan.”
Part of the plan includes phasing out coal-fired power plants, reducing fertilizer usage, and curbing natural gas use over the coming decades. Canada is one of the world’s largest oil and gas producers; however, Trudeau has made it one of his goals to decimate the industry.
Critics have sounded the alarm over the Trudeau government’s involvement in the WEF and other globalist groups, pointing to the socialist, totalitarian nature of the “Great Reset” agenda and its potential to usher in a Communist China-style social credit system.
In a blow to the globalist U.N. agenda, however, Canada’s oil and gas sector recently scored a huge win after the Supreme Court of Canada declared Trudeau’s government’s Impact Assessment Act, dubbed the “no-more pipelines” bill, is mostly “unconstitutional.”
As for Lewis, she is pro-life and has consistently called out the Trudeau government for pushing a globalist, anti-life agenda on Canadians.
Early last year, Lewis noted that the WEF is “not our government” and that Canadians did not “sign up” to be attached to one of its charters. Lewis herself helped expose Canadians to the fact that Trudeau’s Liberal government signed onto the WEF charter in 2020.
Business
Justice Centre launches new petition: Keep cash legal and accessible. Stop Bill C-2

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree speaks to Bill C-2 (Screenshot from CBC video)
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has launched a petition calling upon the Prime Minister of Canada to strike the criminalization of cash payments of $10,000 or more from Bill C-2 and to introduce legislation protecting the right of Canadians to use cash of any amount for legal transactions.
Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree introduced Bill C-2, or the Strong Borders Act, in the House of Commons on June 3, 2025. According to a Government of Canada statement, Bill C-2 will equip law enforcement with tools to secure borders and to combat crime, the drug trade, and money laundering.
Buried deep within the Bill, however, are provisions that would make it a criminal offence for businesses, professionals, and charities to accept cash payments of $10,000 or more in a single transaction or in a series of related transactions.

Bill C-2 at page 59
Justice Centre President John Carpay warns that the criminalization of cash transactions threatens the privacy, freedom of expression, and autonomy of all Canadians. When cash transactions are criminalized, governments, banks, and law enforcement can track and interfere with legitimate purchases and donations.
“We must not criminalize everyday Canadians for using physical currency. Once $10,000 is criminalized, it will be all too easy for future governments to lower the threshold to $5,000, then $1,000, and eventually nothing.”
Bill C-2 is just one point in a concerning anti-cash trend in Canada.
Quebec’s controversial Bill 54, passed into law in March 2024, allows police to assume that any person carrying $2,000 or more in cash is connected to criminal activity. Officers can seize the cash, and citizens must prove their innocence to get the cash back.
“Restricting the use of cash is a dangerous step towards tyranny,” continued Mr. Carpay. “Cash protects citizens from surveillance by government and banks, credit card companies, and other corporations. In a free society, violating the right of law-abiding citizens to use cash is not the answer to money laundering or the drug trade.”
Signers of the petition call upon the Prime Minister of Canada to strike the criminalization of cash payments from Bill C-2.
Signers of the petition also call upon the Prime Minister of Canada to introduce legislation that protects Canadians’ right to use cash of any amount for legal transactions.
Business
Telegram founder Pavel Durov exposes crackdown on digital privacy in Tucker Carlson interview

From LifeSiteNews
By Robert Jones
Durov, who was detained in France in 2024, believes governments are seeking to dismantle personal freedoms.
Tucker Carlson has interviewed Telegram founder Pavel Durov, who remains under judicial restrictions in France nearly a year after a surprise arrest left him in solitary confinement for four days — without contact with his family, legal clarity, or access to his phone.
Durov, a Russian-born tech executive now based in Dubai, had arrived in Paris for a short tourist visit. Upon landing, he was arrested and accused of complicity in crimes committed by Telegram users — despite no evidence of personal wrongdoing and no prior contact from French authorities on the matter.
In the interview, Durov said Telegram has always complied with valid legal requests for IP addresses and other data, but that France never submitted any such requests — unlike other EU states.
Telegram has surpassed a billion users and over $500 million in profit without selling user data, and has notably refused to create government “backdoors” to its encryption. That refusal, Durov believes, may have triggered the incident.
READ: Arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov signals an increasing threat to digital freedom
French prosecutors issued public statements, an unusual move, at the time of his arrest, fueling speculation that the move was meant to send a message.
At present, Durov remains under “judicial supervision,” which limits his movement and business operations.
Carlson noted the irony of Durov’s situating by calling to mind that he was not arrested by Russian President Vladimir Putin but rather a Western democracy.
Former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev has said that Durov should have stayed in Russia, and that he was mistaken in thinking that he would not have to cooperate with foreign security services.
Durov told Carlson that mandates for encryption “backdoors” endanger all users, not just suspects. Once created, such tools inevitably become accessible to hackers, foreign agents, and hostile regimes.
“In the US,” he commented, “you have a process that allows the government to actually force any engineer in any tech company to implement a backdoor and not tell anyone about it.”
READ: Does anyone believe Emmanuel Macron’s claim that Pavel Durov’s arrest was not political?
Durov also pointed to a recent French bill — which was ultimately defeated in the National Assembly — that would have required platforms to break encryptions on demand. A similar EU proposal is now under discussion, he noted.
Despite the persecution, Durov remains committed to Telegram’s model. “We monetize in ways that are consistent with our values,” he told Carlson. “We monetized without violating privacy.”
There is no clear timeline for a resolution of Durov’s case, which has raised serious questions about digital privacy, online freedom, and the limits of compliance for tech companies in the 21st century.