Connect with us

Great Reset

Leslyn Lewis warns WHO pandemic treaty amendments violate Canadian sovereignty

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

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. 

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.   

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Digital ID

Canadian government launches trial version of digital ID for certain licenses, permits

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) department has officially confirmed it is developing a digital ID for certain licenses and permits.

The Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) department has officially confirmed it is developing a digital ID for certain licenses and permits, called “GC Issue and Verify,” which has already been listed on the Google Play store, as a trial-only app for certain users.

The digital ID claims the government can replace and be full “digital versions” of the “physical credentials they already provide today, like work permits and boating licenses.”

“Instead of only having physical credentials in their wallets, people will also be able to securely store their digital credentials on their mobile devices,” says the government.

According to ESDC officials, the digital IDs can be shared online or in-person “when needed, making it easy for departments, organizations, and businesses to validate their information.”

The government argued that since many Canadians already use “digital credentials without realizing it,” such as a digital ticket “stored on our mobile device instead of using a printed ticket,” this would be the same for IDs such as licenses.

ESDC said that “digital options” will be voluntary and that people can still use “traditional physical methods of verification,” instead.

READ: Canada releases new digital ID app for personal documents despite privacy concerns

The reality is that digital IDs and similar systems have long been pushed by globalist groups like the World Economic Forum, an organization with which Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has extensive ties, under the guise of ease of access and security.

Also, Canadians do not want digital IDs, as noted by Canada’s Privy Council research from 2023, which said there is strong public resistance to the use of digital IDs to access government services.

Both GC Wallet and GC Issue and Verify are now being tested with federal partners, those being Transport Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

During COVID, the Canadian federal government released a digital-type app called ArriveCAN app for travel that was a form of digital ID. The app was riddled with technical glitches along with privacy concerns from users.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, the Canadian government hired outside consultants tasked with looking into whether or not officials should proceed with creating a digital ID system for all citizens and residents.

Opp0sition MP Leslyn Lewis, recently warned Canadians to be “on guard” against a push by the ruling Liberal Party to bring forth digital IDs, saying they should be voluntary.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

US Under Secretary of State Slams UK and EU Over Online Speech Regulation, Announces Release of Files on Past Censorship Efforts

Published on

logo

By

Sarah Rogers’ comments draw a new line in the sand between America’s First Amendment and Europe’s tightening grip on online speech.

Speaking during an appearance on The Liz Truss Show, Rogers said Washington intends to respond to the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom after it sought to bring the website 4chan under its jurisdiction.
She said the situation “forced” the US to defend its constitutional protections, warning that “when British regulators decree that British law applies to American speech on American sites on American soil with no connection to Britain,” the matter can no longer be ignored.
Rogers called it “a perverse blessing” that the dispute is forcing a renewed transatlantic conversation about free expression, observing that “Britain and America did develop the free speech tradition together.”
Rogers announced that the State Department will soon publish a collection of previously unreleased internal emails and documents describing earlier US government involvement in social media moderation efforts.
The release is part of what she termed a “truth and reconciliation initiative” that will include material linked to the now-defunct Global Engagement Center, which she said had coordinated with outside organizations to identify content for takedown.
That operation was “immediately dismantled” after she assumed her current post.
She argued that foreign governments have moved from cooperation to coercion in their dealings with US companies. “Europe and the UK and other governments abroad are…trying to nullify the American First Amendment by enforcing against American companies and American speakers and American soil,” Rogers said, referring to the EU’s fine against X and Ofcom’s recent enforcement campaigns.
On domestic policy, she criticized the UK’s Online Safety Act, saying that it is being sold as child protection legislation but in practice functions as a speech control measure.
“These statutes are just censoring adult political speech is not the best way to protect kids and it’s probably the worst way,” she said.
Rogers noted that under such laws, even parliamentary remarks about criminal networks could be censored if regulators deem them harmful.
Turning to Ofcom’s ongoing 4chan case, Rogers said its legal position effectively claims authority over purely American websites.
She offered a hypothetical: “I could go set up a website in my garage…about American political controversies…and Ofcom’s legal position nonetheless is that if I run afoul of British content laws, then I have to pay money for the British government.”
Rogers said she expects the US government to issue a response soon.
Throughout the interview, Rogers framed the current wave of global online regulation as an effort to suppress what she called “chaotic speech” that emerges with every major communications shift.
“People panic and they want to shove that innovation back in the bottle,” she said, warning that such attempts have “never worked.”
Her remarks mark one of the strongest rebukes yet from a senior American official toward the growing European model of compelled content moderation.
Rogers suggested that this model not only undermines open debate but also sets a precedent for governments worldwide to police political speech beyond their borders.
Continue Reading

Trending

X