TSCE #13(D): Forums of Parliamentarians on Population and Development, Global Alliance To Kill Babies

New Zealand announced in March 2020 that it was drastically loosening its abortion laws. In the middle of a “pandemic”, the priority is making it easier to kill babies. As horrible and Satanic as Jacinda Ardern is, there are much bigger problems that just her.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

While abortion is trumpeted as a “human right” in Western societies, the obvious questions have to be asked: Why is it a human right? Who are these groups benefiting financially, and why are so they so fiercely against free speech? Will the organs be trafficked afterwards? And aren’t these groups just a little bit too coordinated?

2. Important Links

New Zealand Bill To Water Down Abortion Laws
Parliamentarians Against Human Trafficking
Family Planning New Zealand
NZPPD (Parliamentarians On Population & Dev), New Chair
Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development
Australia’s Global Network
Canadian Ass’n Of Parliamentarians On Population & Development
European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights
Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD)
NZPPD’s Facebook Page
Family Planning New Zealand’s Twitter Account
Life News: NZ Pushing Sex-Ed On 5 Year Olds
WHO On Population And Reproductive Rights
1994 Cairo Conference On Population Demoraphics
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem: Protect Down Babies

CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention.
CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan.
CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement).
CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974.
CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.

3. Cognitive Dissonance On Human Trafficking

Have to love the mental gymnastics here: Parliamentarians “claim” that they oppose human trafficking. However, there are also a lot of them who see no issue with promoting mass abortions. After all, those organs are often sold to others. It’s human trafficking, just on a piecemeal basis.

4. Abortion Aids Population Replacement Agenda

One thing to keep in mind, many of the same people pushing for fewer local births are also advocating increased immigration rates. These seemingly contradictory steps seem counterintuitive at first.

[1] Have less children here, more abortions
[2] More migration because of declining birth rate.

In short, this is the population replacement agenda. Get locals having few (or no) children, and then use it as a pretext for bringing more people over. The same group who touts abortion as a “human right” also champions “replacement migration”, to fix declining populations.

5. NZ Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

New Zealand Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development (NZPPD)
The New Zealand Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development (NZPPD) is open to any New Zealand MP and focuses its work mainly in the Pacific. The group looks at issues around sexual and reproductive health, women’s rights, and development issues.
.
The group was established in 1998 in response to the International Conference on Population and Development and its programme of action.
.
Barbara Kuriger MP is the current Chair of the group, with Family Planning acting as its secretariat.
.
Follow the group’s Facebook page for more information and updates.

Apparently, working towards the destruction of the family, and the abortions of girls — who would grow up to become women — is considered women’s rights, empowerment, and feminism. It’s difficult to grasp who such a harmful ideology can be passed off as something beneficial to society.

6. Australian Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

The Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development is part of a regional network of similar groups – the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development, and works with other similar parliamentary groups around the globe.

The Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development, as a cross-party group, has for 25 years worked collaboratively to champion gender equality, and sexual and reproductive health and rights in international development.

The APGPD’s remit is guided by the Sustainable Development Goals and the landmark 1994 International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action, which recognise gender equality and women’s empowerment as global priorities, integral to eradicating deprivation and injustice.

This group’s agenda, which includes a pro-abortion stance, is in line with the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. It’s alarming to see this nonchalant attitude towards the lives of the most vulnerable.

7. Canadian Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development

The Canadian Association of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (CAPPD) provides a forum for the exchange of ideas on population, sexual and reproductive health, human rights and development issues. Formed in 1997, CAPPD is open to all sitting Senators and Members of Parliament.

CAPPD coordinates efforts with several parliamentary associations throughout Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe to encourage governments to keep their commitments to reproductive health and women’s rights, as agreed by 179 countries at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, Egypt.

A group of politicians in Canada are also committed to the agenda. Just another branch of the global alliance to promote this depopulation agenda.

  • Pam Damoff
  • Hedy Fry
  • Irene Mathyssen
  • Elizabeth May
  • Marilou McPhedran
  • Raj Saini
  • Anita Vandenbeld

These are sitting Members of Parliament from the Greens, NDP and Liberal Parties. A cross-party commitment to making “reproductive services” available to all.

8. EU Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights

We are stronger when we speak with a single voice. Amplifying the unified voice of MPs committed to SRHR is central to our mission. EPF provides a venue for parliamentarians to coordinate common statements on international developments related to SRHR.

Typically, these statements urge action from governments and international organisatons; or call on states to place women’s empowerment at the centre of key international agreements.

Over the years, EPF has built good relations with SRHR champions through the European All-Party Parliamentary Groups, the European Parliament working group MEPs for SRR and the Global Parliamentary Alliance for Health, Rights and Development.

Within the European Union, there are efforts to get pro-abortion politicians together in order to promote what they call “human rights”. A major “right” as they call it, is the right to abortion.

9. Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development

The Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD) is a regional non-governmental organization based in Bangkok, Thailand. AFPPD serves as a coordinating body of 30 National Committees of Parliamentarians on Population and Development.

AFPPD engages with parliamentarians from Asia and the Pacific to champion policies on population and development. AFPPD educates, motivates, involves, and mobilizes parliamentarians on the linkages between increasing population and development issues such as reproductive health, family planning, food security, water resources, sustainable development, environment, ageing, urbanization, migration, HIV/AIDS, and gender equality.

Asian politicians are also being consulted by this “population and development” group, which pushes for more abortion, and easier access to it.

10. Population Summit In Cairo, 1994

Referring to the 1994 Cairo Conference on Population and Development, she said that revolution acknowledged that people –- women and men, mothers and fathers –- and not governments were the best judges of how many children to bring into the world, and where and when. A broader theme that ran through the Conference was the realization that, in talking about curtailing population growth and the complex relationships between population and development, or population and the protection of the environment, women had to be a central factor.

At “Cairo+10” [the 10-year anniversary of Cairo], she said, the same wide range of people and opinions heard in Cairo were beginning to be heard again. Some inside the United Nations system feared that a lobby led by an unlikely combination of conservative Middle Eastern nations, the United States and the Holy See would mount a major drive to dilute or undo the language. Others were more optimistic, as Cairo had been a seismic shift not easily reversed.

The Commission also addressed its agenda item “Programme implementation and future programme of work of the Secretariat in the field of population”. Mr. Chamie, introducing the Secretary-General’s report on “Programme implementation and progress of work in the field of population in 2003: Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs” (document E/CN.9/2004/5), and a note by the Secretary-General on the “Proposed strategic framework for the period 2006-2007” (E/CN.9/2004/6), said demographics were not merely about numbers. It was about development of human society. Development, in turn, related to low mortality, which was an indicator of the well-being of a society.

He then highlighted several activities of the Population Division, including production of a document on world population policies, a report on urbanization and two wall charts –- one on urban agglomerations and one on urban/rural movements. A chart on world contraceptive use was also available, he said, as well as an extensive database on trends in marriage since 1960.

A major idea of the 1994 Conference was to get countries having less children, and artificially drive down the birth rate. Instead, the focus would be on a better quality of life for those who were there. Abortion and contraception were heavily promoted as population control methods.

But remember: the United Nations (and many NGOs), promote a lower birth rate in Developed Nations. They also call for a replacement population to be imported to make up the difference.

This sort of thing should be considered genocide, should it not?

And why the recent focus on allowing later and later abortions? It wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that the organs would be more developed, and thus worth more money, would it?

11. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem urged state lawmakers Tuesday to protect unborn babies with Down syndrome from discrimination by passing new pro-life legislation.

In her state of the state address, the pro-life Republican governor said legislation to ban abortions on unborn babies based on a Down syndrome diagnosis will be one of her top priorities for the year.

“Children with Down Syndrome are a gift to us all,” she wrote on Twitter. “I am asking the South Dakota legislature to pass a law that bans the abortion of a preborn child, just because that child is diagnosed with Down Syndrome. We must stand for the right to life of every preborn child.”

Prior to her address, Noem appeared on Fox and Friends with Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy and her husband, former Wisconsin Congressman Sean Duffy, and their daughter Valentina who has Down syndrome.

Let’s end this on a positive note: the Governor of South Dakota recently made a public call to protect babies with Down Syndrome from being targeted for abortion. Someone who actually values life.

Canada Condemns China’s Human Rights Abuses, But Still Does Trade


Testimony at Parliament is available to watch. China’s human rights abuses are detailed in the House of Commons.

1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation

Serious issues like smuggling or trafficking are routinely avoided in public discourse. Also important are the links between open borders and human smuggling; between ideology and exploitation; between tolerance and exploitation; between abortion and organ trafficking; or between censorship and complicity. Mainstream media will also never get into the organizations who are pushing these agendas, nor the complicit politicians. These topics don’t exist in isolation, and are interconnected.

2. Important Links

1948 UN Convention Genocide Prevention Punishing
Canadian Gov’t Condemns Treatment Of Uyghurs In China
House Of Commons Study
Testimony From Dominic Barton
Business Council Of Canada
Dominic Barton’s Century Initiative Profile
Canada-China Business Council
CBC Article By John Paul Tasker
CBC Article On New Canadian Measures For China

uyghur.01.letter
uyghur.02.another.letter
uyghur.03.prisoner.testimony
uyghur.04.situation.of.the.camps
uyghur.05.testimonial
uyghur.06.CSRDN.plea.for.help
uyghur.07.global.affairs.canada

December 8 Testimony

3. UN On Preventing/Punishing Genocide

Hereby agree as hereinafter provided :
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.

This is how the United Nations defines genocide, and how it seeks to punish it. Keep this in mind for later.

4. Canada Condemns Abuses By China

Building on the important testimony of seven witnesses over five sessions before the Subcommittee in 2018, on 20–21 July 2020 the Subcommittee convened urgent meetings to understand the latest developments in the plight of the Uyghurs. Over two days and 12 hours of testimony, the Subcommittee heard from academics, civil society as well as many survivors of the Government of China’s atrocities in the region. The subcommittee wishes to make clear that the condemnations in this statement are directed towards the Government of China, as represented by the Chinese Communist Party, and not the Chinese people, who the Subcommittee support wholeheartedly and hope that one day will benefit from the peace, freedom and security enjoyed by many others in this world.

The Subcommittee was profoundly disturbed by what it heard and is convinced of the need for a strong response. The Subcommittee heard that the Government of China has been employing various strategies to persecute Muslim groups living in Xinjiang, including mass detentions, forced labour, pervasive state surveillance and population control. Witnesses were clear that the Government of China’s actions are a clear attempt to eradicate Uyghur culture and religion. Some witnesses stated that the Government of China’s actions meet the definition of genocide as set out in Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention).

The Subcommittee unequivocally condemns the persecution of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang by the Government of China. Based on the evidence put forward during the Subcommittee hearings, both in 2018 and 2020, the Subcommittee is persuaded that the actions of the Chinese Communist Party constitute genocide as laid out in the Genocide Convention.

The Government of Canada should also impose sanctions on entities and individuals that benefit from the use of forced labour. Furthermore, recognizing the impact that government and corporate corruption play in allowing the practice of forced labour to continue throughout the world, the Government of Canada must condemn corruption in all its forms and take firm actions to combat it.

The Government of Canada should empower the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise with independence and the power to investigate human rights abuse allegations and enact a comprehensive human rights due diligence law that compels businesses to respect the most current international human rights standards across their global operations and supply chains and be held accountable for harms caused or on behalf of their operations.

The Government of Canada should conduct a review of its procurement practices to ensure it is not purchasing products manufactured through forced labour. It should also create legislation with respect to federal government procurement practices to strengthen transparency and oversight mechanisms, such as reporting to parliament, particularly as it relates to product origins, production and manufacturing.

The Subcommittee was informed that the Government of China’s repressive measures against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang are part of a broader strategy to control the region. Xinjiang is a resource-rich area with important oil deposits. It also borders several Central Asian countries that the Government of China considers strategically important for its Belt and Road Initiative and its pursuit of expansionism. Because some Uyghurs desire more autonomy or independence from China, the Government of China considers them a threat to its economic development and prosperity. The Subcommittee was informed that its solution is the elimination of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in the region.

The Canadian Government has declared that what is going on in China amounts to genocide. These measures seem designed and calculated to bring about the destruction of these groups as a whole.

5. Open Borders Policies Are Genocide

Yes, displacing or eliminating a group is a human rights violation. To address the elephant in the room: current policies in Canada amount to open borders, and to erosion of distinct groups. These are things the public never voted for. Such a replacement would be considered genocide under the UN’s own definition here. But to speak up against the Kalergi Plan is considered racism.

6. Such Measures Now Used In “Pandemic”

Considering that many nations are at least considering mandatory vaccinations, would this not lead to mass sterilization? After all, that could easily happen. Given the “isolation centers” being built, and the increase in surveillance, is this not a roundabout way of imposing these conditions? Perhaps this “pandemic” is a method to get the public to accept this as normal.

7. Dominic Barton Supports Trade With China

Canada’s Ambassador to China, Dominic Barton, supports continued trade with China. It’s worth pointing out, however, he is a co-Founder, and former Board Member of Century Initiative, an NGO committed to growing Canada’s population 100 million people. Considering the economic focus of the group, Barton likely sees little real issue with China, or large scale Chinese immigration.

Barton has also been lobbied by the Business Council of Council, which Goldy Hyer is President and CEO. Hyer also is on the Board of Century Initiative.

As a bit of an aside, Century Initiative is chaired by Mark Wiseman. He was the Senior Managing Director of Blackrock, which owns SNC Lavalin.

8. Canada-China Business Council

There is Ambassador Barton, featured prominently.
Who else runs the group?

  • Paul Desmarais Sr. — former head of Power Corp (deceased)
  • Andre Desmarais — son-in-law of Jean Chretien
  • Oliver Desmarais — Vice President of Power Corp
  • Sam Boutziouvis — VP (Government Relations) of SNC Lavalin
  • Morgan Elliott — VP (Government Affairs) of Huawei
  • Tim McGuire — Executive VP, China Construction Bank
  • Martin Cauchon — was in Jean Chretien’s Cabinet
  • James Moore — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Stockwell Day — was in Stephen Harper’s Cabinet
  • Scott Brison — was in Justin Trudeau’s Cabinet

Do you think that these connections might have something to do with the fact that Canada is still doing business with China? Perhaps these things are related.

9. Canada (Not Really) Stops China Trade

The federal government announced a suite of new regulations today meant to ensure that Canadian companies are not complicit in human rights abuses or the use of forced labour in China’s Xinjiang province.

The measures include new requirements for firms that do business in the region and a pledge to ban the export of products from Canada to China if there is a chance they could be used by Chinese authorities for surveillance, repression, arbitrary detention or forced labour.

“Canada is deeply concerned regarding the mass arbitrary detention and mistreatment of Uighurs and other ethnic minorities by Chinese authorities,” Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne said in a news release shortly before leaving the department to become the new minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.

“Nobody should face mistreatment on the basis of their religion or ethnicity,” Champagne added.

To be clear on this, the Canadian Government has no issue with doing business with China, in spite the human rights abuses they allege. Instead, the requirement is that there be no exports if the goods themselves can be used to aid in those abuses.

This is a bit of tortured logic. If trading with China enriches the Government, then couldn’t ANY trade potentially be used to finance such abuses?

So, do human rights abroad mean anything? Or is the “illusion” of caring about human rights what matters? Seems that the Government’s actions are all just for show.

IBC #9: BIS, Central Banks On Digital Currency Implementation

BIS, the Bank for International Settlements, is working towards implementing a digital currency that would replace cash. There doesn’t appear to be any ideological concerns against this. Instead, it becomes a matter of details.

1. More On The International Banking Cartel

For more on the banking cartel, check this page. The Canadian Government, like so many others, has sold out the independence and sovereignty of its monetary system to foreign interests. BIS, like its central banks, exceed their agenda and try to influence other social agendas. See who is really controlling things, and the common lies that politicians and media figures tell. Now, the bankers work with the climate mafia and pandemic pushers to promote control and debt slavery.

2. Important Links

https://www.bis.org/press/p201009.htm
https://www.bis.org/publ/othp33.pdf
BIS Digital Currency Paper
BIS Video Promoting Digital Currency
Citi On Digital Currency (Video)
Digital Currency Discussion, India(Video)
Various Digital Currency Options
World Affairs Council On Digital Currency (Video)
Bank For International Settlements Innovation Hub
BIS on digital innovation options

3. BIS Working Our Details Of Digital Currency

Yet the world is changing. Even before Covid-19, cash use in payments was declining in some advanced economies. Commercially provided, fast and convenient digital payments have grown enormously in volume and diversity. To evolve and pursue their public policy objectives in a digital world, central banks are actively researching the pros and cons of offering a digital currency to the public (a “general purpose” central bank digital currency (CBDC)). Understanding of CBDCs has advanced significantly in the last few years. Published research, policy work and proofs-of-concept from central banks have gone a long way towards establishing the potential benefits and risks.

For the central banks contributing to this report, the common motivation for exploring a general purpose CBDC is its use as a means of payment. Providing cash to the public is a core responsibility of central banks and a public good. All the contributing central banks commit to continue providing cash as long as there is public demand. Yet a CBDC could provide a complementary central bank money to the public, supporting a more resilient and diverse domestic payment system. It might also offer opportunities not possible with cash while supporting innovation.

2.1 Payment motivations and challenges
2.1.1 Continued access to central bank money
In jurisdictions where access to cash is in decline, there is a danger that households and businesses will no longer have access to risk-free central bank money. Some central banks consider it an obligation to provide public access and that this access could be crucial for confidence in a currency. A CBDC could act like a “digital banknote” and could fulfil this obligation.

2.1.2 Resilience
Cash serves as a backup payment method to electronic systems if those networks cease to function. However, if access to cash is marginalised, it will be less useful as a backup method if the need arises. A CBDC system could act as an additional payment method, improving operational resilience. Compared to cash, a CBDC system might provide a better means to distribute and use funds in geographically remote locations or during natural disasters.

However, significant offline capabilities would need to be developed, both for the CBDC system and any dependencies (eg some availability of electricity for mobile devices). Counterfeiting and cyber risk present a challenge. Cash has sophisticated anti-counterfeiting features and large-scale issues rarely occur. Theoretically, a successful cyber attack on a digital CBDC system could quickly threaten a significant number of users and their confidence in the wider system (as it could for a large bank or payment service provider). Defending against cyber attacks will be made more difficult as the number of endpoints in a general purpose CBDC system will be significantly larger than those of current wholesale central bank systems.

References

  • Adrian, T and T Mancini Griffoli (2019): “The rise of digital money”, IMF FinTech Notes, no 19/001, July.
  • Auer, R and R Böhme (2020): “The technology of retail central bank digital currency”, BIS Quarterly Review,
    March, pp 85–100.
  • Auer, R, G Cornelli and J Frost (2020): Rise of the central bank digital currencies: drivers, approaches and
    technologies”, BIS Working Papers, no 880, August.
  • Auer, R, P Haene and H Holden (2020): Multi CBDC arrangements and the future of cross-border payments,
    BIS papers, forthcoming.
  • Bank of Canada (2020): Contingency planning for a central bank digital currency, February.
  • Bank of Canada and Monetary Authority of Singapore (2019): Enabling cross-border high value transfer
    using distributed ledger technologies, May.
  • Bank of England (2020): Central bank digital currency: opportunities, challenges and design, March.
  • Bank of Thailand and Hong Kong Monetary Authority (2020): Inthanon-LionRock: leveraging distributed
    ledger technology to increase efficiency in cross-border payments, January.
  • Bech, M and R Garratt (2017): “Central bank cryptocurrencies”, BIS Quarterly Review, September, pp 55–
    70.
  • Bindseil, U (2020): “Tiered CBDC and the financial system”, ECB Working Paper Series, no 2351, January.
  • Boar, C, H Holden and A Wadsworth (2020): “Impending arrival – a sequel to the survey on central bank
    digital currency”, BIS Papers, no 107, January.
  • Bossone, B (2001): “Should banks be narrowed?”, IMF Working Papers, WP/01/159, October.
  • Brunnermeier, M, H James and J-P Landau (2019): “The digitalization of money”, NBER Working Papers, no
    26300, September.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (2018): Cross-border retail payments, February.
    ——— (2020): Enhancing cross-border payments: building blocks of a global roadmap, July.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and Markets Committee (2018): Central bank digital
    currencies, March.
  • Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and World Bank Group (2020): Payment aspects of
    financial inclusion in the fintech era, April.
  • Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (2003): The role of central bank money in payment
    systems, August.
  • European Central Bank and Bank of Japan (2019): Synchronised cross-border payments, June.
  • European Central Bank and Bank of Japan (2020): Balancing confidentiality and auditability in a distributed
    ledger environment, February.
  • Ferrari, M, A Mehl and L Stracca (2020): Central bank digital currency in the open economy, forthcoming.
    G7 Working Group on Stablecoins (2019): Investigating the impact of global stablecoins, October.
  • Kahn, C, F Rivadeneyra and R Wong (2018): “Should the central bank issue e-money?”, Bank of Canada Staff Working Paper, 2018-58, December.
  • Sveriges Riksbank (2018): The Riksbank’s e-krona project, report 2, October

This goes far beyond some academic theory. There has been serious research and study into issuing digital currency, and it has gone on for quite some time. The “pandemic” seems to be a pretext to push it further along.

Nice to see that some of the major risks are addressed, such as hacking, or system malfunction erasing financial information.

Also, this must be pointed out: most central banks are privately owned and/or controlled. This means that countries must borrow (at interest) in order to get money for day to day operations. Such a system is not necessary, but is enacted for the purposes of creating endless debt slavery. Politicians go along with this because they have no interest in the well being of their people.

4. The Fraud Of Private Central Banking

One of the reasons that digital currency is touted is supposedly to combat money laundering. Interesting, because private central banking (money borrowed at interest), is arguably the greatest financial fraud ever perpetuated. In this scheme, the only way countries can get money — created from nothing — is to borrow it at interest.

5. Digital Currency Openly Discussed

This discussion is hardly limited to BIS. Banks and financial institutions across the planet are talking about how to implement such a system, and have been doing so for many years.

A curious point: things like Bitcoin are promoted as a decentralized way to make transactions, yet banks talk about ways to centrally manage these.

6. Bank For Int’l Settlements Innovation Hub

Hub projects and topics will evolve over time, and the BIS has been working to identify areas of work for the Hub that reflect the innovation priorities of the central bank community and which could be scaled up through international cooperation. Topics under consideration for the work agenda include central bank digital currencies, global stablecoins, payment innovations, the impact of big tech on financial intermediation, regtech and suptech, fast-paced electronic markets, and digitalisation of trade finance.

What does the BIS Innovation Hub do?
The mandate of the BIS Innovation Hub is to identify and develop in-depth insights into critical trends in financial technology of relevance to central banks, to explore the development of public goods to enhance the functioning of the global financial system, and to serve as a focal point for a network of central bank experts on innovation. It complements the already well established cooperation within the BIS-hosted committees.

Digital currency is just one of the things that BIS is working on. The group wants to be at the forefront of the trends that are emerging in financing and payment processing.

7. Privacy Element Missing From Discussion

What about people who want to make business transactions without there being a record for many years? Not everyone is okay with every food or minor purchase being a record available for others to see. Although a growing population seems unconcerned with such things, there is the inherent loss of privacy.

And what about the loss of anonymity or choice when it comes to association, or viewpoints? Is it not easier to connect a person (and their public statements), to their finances? If they happen to hold “incorrect” views, what’s to stop there digital currency from being erased? What’s to prevent institutions from refusing to do business with them? For a concrete example, banks these days are promoting forced diversity and globalism, although many are opposed to it.

Although this sounds farfetched, what’s to stop a Chinese style “social credit” system from making someone’s life impossible to live? Such a thing is possible then finance and identity cannot be separated.

CV #10(B): Quebec Pharma Lobbying, Bipartisan Support For Lockdowns

Quebec Premier Francois Legault announces that more freedoms will be stripped away under the pretense of public safety. This will involve a forced curfew on Quebecers. But who’s really running the show in Quebec?

Link To Quebec Lobbying Registry

1. All Quebec Parties Support Lockdowns

To be fair, this not just Legault who is pushing this effort to impose a curfew. All parties in Quebec support it. Although they moan about the details of implementation, they are ideologically on the same page. Despite there being no evidence, none are willing to publicly reject it. This is only the appearance of opposition.

2. Gates Foundation Behind Quebec Lockdown

Date: October 2020
Purpose: to increase Canada’s global leadership through investments in international development
Amount: $541,566
Term: 24
Topic: Family Planning, Public Awareness and Analysis
Regions Served: GLOBAL|NORTH AMERICA
Program: Advocacy|Global Development
Grantee Location: Westmount, Quebec
Grantee Website: http://www.global-canada.org

In October 2020, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donated $541,566 to Global Canada, a “think tank” proposing martial law (a.k.a. lockdowns) throughout Canada. See the paper that is now publicly available. Keep in mind, that shills like Brian Lilley refused to properly cover that.

3. Gates Foundation Major McGill Donor

In October 2018, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donated $7.3 million to UNESCO in Montreal. There was also $195,000 handed out in November 2017. Those are far from the only grants in Quebec.

Date Of Grant Amount Given
November 2012 $1,488,773
November 2013 $2,351,021
October 2014 $196,305
October 2015 $100,000
August 2017 $652,488
September 2017 $50,000
July 2019 $629,970
April 2019 $524,285
April 2020 $839,644
September 2020 $1,227,508

Too lengthy to go into here, but it seems that an awful lot of powerful politicians have gone either to McGill, or University of British Columbia. Must be quite the networking opportunities.

4. Quebec Lobbying Registry Records

  • Aspen Pharmacare
  • Astellas Pharma Canada Inc
  • Canadian Biosimilars Forum
  • Gilead Sciences
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Laurent Pharmaceuticals
  • Merck
  • Novartis
  • Pfizer
  • Purdue Pharma
  • Sanofi
  • Teva
  • Vertex Pharmaceuticals (Canada) Inc.

This is by no means an exhaustive list, but some of the companies that are lobbying in Quebec.

5. Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association

On behalf of CGPA and its member companies, congratulations to François Legault and his team for their historic victory in Monday’s Quebec elections. The CGPA wishes them every success in their majority mandate for the next four years. I also congratulate the elected representatives of all political parties, as well as the defeated candidates who participated in the important democratic process that has taken place over the last 40 days.

Our association looks forward to working with the new government on issues of importance to our members as well as Quebec’s health-care system and its economy. The CGPA and the Government of Quebec signed an agreement in July 2017 that achieves substantial savings for the health care system while helping to provide a more sustainable environment for generic pharmaceutical manufacturers. We remain committed to our ongoing partnership with the Government of Quebec.

Our association also reiterates its disappointment with the provisions of the US – Mexico – Canada Agreement (USMCA) that will delay Quebecers’ access to competitively priced biosimilar drugs. Biologic medicines are the fastest growing segment in the health sector. These delays will be costly to patients, the Government of Quebec and Quebec employers that sponsor drug plans for their employees.

Interesting. Is this normal to congratulate every politician who ever runs in any race? Or is in order to remain friendly with everyone, should the balance of power shift?

It seems that all major political parties are on board with the same vaccination and martial law initiatives. And it’s the citizens who suffer.

(1) Link To Quebec Lobbying Registry
(2) CTV: All QC Parties Support Lockdown Measures
(3) Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Main Page
(4) Global Canada’s Paper On Proposed Lockdowns
(5) Gates Donated $541,000 To Global Canada Group, 2020
(6) Gates Donated $103,000 To Global Canada Group, 2015
(7) Global Canada’s Financial Supporters
(8) Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association

CV #4(C): Crestview Strategy’s Ashton Arsenault Takes Over Lobbying For GAVI

The Gates Foundation lobbies the Canadian Government, but not directly. It uses proxies. GAVI (the Global Vaccine Alliance), is heavily funded by Gates, and it employs a lobbying firm called Crestview Strategy. Crestview was co-founded by Rob Silver, husband of Katie Telford, and is well connected. Lobbyists are dispatched to Ottawa to try to get more taxpayer money.

The most recent to sign up is Ashton Arsenault.

Keep in mind, lobbying is legal (for the most part), as long as all meetings are documented, and available to the public. Doesn’t make it any less underhanded though.

1. Ashton Arsenault Latest Shill For GAVI

Ashton Arsenault is a senior consultant with Crestview Strategy based out of the Ottawa office.

Prior to joining Crestview, Ashton worked as a political aid on Parliament Hill where he was responsible for parliamentary affairs and issues management for the Minister of National Revenue. Prior to that, he worked as a legislative researcher in the Official Opposition Office in Prince Edward Island. He continues to volunteer in electoral politics at the federal level.

Ashton has been involved in politics for several years, serving as a campaign manager for a Conservative candidate in the 2015 General Election. As well, he served as the University of Prince Edward Island’s Chair of Council from 2011-2012.

Ashton holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the University of Prince Edward Island and a Master of Political Management from Carleton University in Ottawa.

Zakery Blais worked for (Liberal) MP David Lametti, and Jason Clarke volunteered for (Liberal) candidates in Ottawa for the 2015 election. Arsenault has ties to the Conservative Party of Canada, showing that this is not simply a partisan issue.

Make no mistake, lobbying is a very effective way for corporations to get what they want. In total, GAVI has secured over $1 billion in funding, from different administrations.

2. Arsenault Also Represents Medicago

Arsenault is also lobbying on behalf of Medicago, which is working with GlaxoSmithKline to develop a plant-based vaccine for the coronavirus.

3. Arsenault Frequently A CPC Talking Head

Ashton Arsenault regularly appears on television in order to sell CPC talking points to a gullible crowd. This is, of course, not unique to Conservatives. All of these “debates” on screen are arranged to address pre-planned scripts for the public.

Arsenault has donated several times to the Conservative Party of Canada, but the amounts aren’t enough to draw much attention.

4. Arsenault Replaces Zakery Blais

Zakery Blais was previously a lobbyist for Crestview Strategy, on behalf of GAVI. He appears to have since left the firm. Blais also worked for David Lametti (yes, the sitting Attorney General), back when he was a Parliamentary Secretary.

5. What Else Crestview Strategy Does

Drive winning arguments.
.
Crestview Strategy effectively represents the interests of corporations, not-for-profits and industry associations to achieve results with governments around the world.
.
No longer is a winning outcome based on ‘who you know’ or the ‘magic meeting’. It is about contributing to the policy process, presenting a case that is supported by authentic community voices, verified impact and compelling insight. And getting in front of the right decision makers and opinion leaders to make that case.

Drive winning engagement.
.
We build and run campaigns that mobilize support and impact change for both political and corporate clients.
.
Mobilization campaigns are premised on the simple fact that for elected officials, the single most influential voice in shaping their decision is that of their local voters, influencers, and community leaders.
.
The benefits of mobilization go beyond just a one-off campaign. The long-term goal of mobilization is to increase engagement potential, provide greater value for members, and to increase the share of voice and influence outcomes.

Keep in mind that firms like Crestview Strategy employ operatives who cover multiple parties. By doing this, it ensures that influence peddling will be effective, regardless of who officially sits in power. It’s important to note that few politicians actually make their own decisions.

(1) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=368098&regId=906375
(2) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca/ashton-arsenault
(3) https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashton-arsenault-3a241056/
(4) https://archive.is/dQIoW
(5) https://www.linkedin.com/in/zakery-blais-13a76b118/
(6) https://archive.is/tybUn

CV #30(C): AstraZeneca, Another Candidate To Vaccinate Canadians, And The World

AstraZeneca is one of the pharmaceutical companies looking to sell large quantities of vaccines to Canada, for a virus that has a 99% survival rate. One has to wonder what the public isn’t being told.

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the “Great Reset“. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. Also: there is little to no science behind what our officials are doing; they promote degenerate behaviour; the Australian Department of Health admits the PCR tests don’t work; the US CDC admits testing is heavily flawed; and The International Health Regulations are legally binding. See here, here, and here. The media is paid off, and our democracy compromised, shown: here, here, here, and here.

2. AstraZeneca Lobbied M-132 Cmte Vice-Chair

Motion Text
That the Standing Committee on Health be instructed to undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded health research, with the goals of lowering drugs costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally; and that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House no later than one year from the time this motion is adopted.

Remember Motion M-132? It was the Motion introduced in 2017 to finance drugs and drug research both for Canada and the world. See here and here. Marilyn Gladu was the Vice-Chair on that Committee, and hence, lobbying her would carry significant weight.

3. David Lametti Lobbied By AstraZeneca

During the years of 2016 to 2018, David Lametti was a Parliamentary Secretary the Minister of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development. Since early 2019, however, he has been the Attorney General of Canada.

As addressed here, Zakery Blais was an Assistant to Lametti when he was a Parliamentary Secretary. Now, he works for the lobbying firm, Crestview Strategy, which was co-Founded by Rob Silver, Katie Telford’s husband. Blais has been a lobbyist pushing for public money for his then client, GAVI

4. “Global Leader”, Michelle Rempel-Garner

Michelle holds a degree in economics. Highlights of her many honours include being named one of Canada’s Top 100 Most Powerful Women by the Women’s Executive Network, Calgary’s “Top 40 under 40”, and being named twice by Maclean’s Magazine as their Parliamentarian of the Year – Rising Star calling her “one of the government’s most impressive performers.” Michelle is also a Young Global Leader, invited to be so by the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum calls the Forum of Young Global Leaders a “unique and diverse community of the world’s most outstanding, next generation leaders.” Rempel was also recently named one of “Alberta’s 50 Most Influential People”.

Although the link seems disabled, Rempel is held in high regards by the World Economic Forum. She is part of the Young Global leaders. This raises the legitimate question of who she really serves. Information is also available on her website.

When Rempel-Garner openly and publicly calls for the entire Canadian population to be vaccinated, who’s really speaking? Is it her, or the drug companies who lobby her?

5. AZ Pushing Canada For GLOBAL Pharma

Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime provides a way for the world’s developing and least-developed countries to import high-quality drugs and medical devices at a lower cost to treat the diseases that bring suffering to their citizens. It is one part of the Government of Canada’s broader strategy to assist countries in their struggle against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other diseases.

Just so we’re clear on what’s going on, AstraZeneca is pushing for Canada to buy vaccines so that they can be provided at little or no cost to the 3rd World. In short, Canadian taxpayers would be on the hook for vaccinating other countries. Of course, this is in addition to getting a domestic supply.

And what about their lobbyists over the years?

Public offices held: Tara Bingham
Executive Assistant and Special Assistant for Parliamentary Affairs & Communications, Hon. Belinda Stronach, M.P., 2004-2005
Parliamentary Assistant, Grant McNally, M.P., 1999-2004
Researcher, Office of the Leader of the Opposition, Preston Manning, M.P., 1997-1999

Public offices held: William Charnetski
Special Advisor, The Honourable Allan Rock, Q.C., P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 1995-1996
Executive Assistant, William C. Graham, Q.C., Member of Parliament (Rosedale), 1993-1995

Public offices held: Marie-Chantale Lepine
Director of Communications, Rt. Hon. Joe Clark, M.P., 2001-2002

Ties to both the Liberal Party of Canada, and the Conservatives. In this case, it doesn’t seem to matter who is in power.

6. Who Are AstraZeneca’s Lobbyists?

https://archive.is/ypVdu

7. More Lobbying By AstraZeneca

From the Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario Registries.

8. Who Runs AstraZeneca?

  • Pascal Soriot, Executive Director and CEO
  • Marc Dunoyer, Executive Director and CFO
  • Katarina Ageborg, Executive Vice-President, Sustainability and Chief Compliance Officer; President AstraZeneca AB, Sweden
  • José Baselga, Executive Vice-President, Oncology R&D
  • Pam Cheng, Executive Vice-President, Operations and Information Technology
  • Ruud Dobber, Executive Vice-President, BioPharmaceuticals Business Unit
  • David Fredrickson, Executive Vice-President, Oncology Business Unit
  • Menelas (Mene) Pangalos, Executive Vice-President, BioPharmaceuticals R&D
  • Jeff Pott, Executive Vice-President, Human Resources and General Counsel
  • Iskra Reic, Executive Vice-President, Europe and Canada
  • Leon Wang, Executive Vice-President, International

https://www.astrazeneca.com/our-company/leadership.html

9. AstraZeneca Ordered To Pay Money

AstraZeneca LP, a pharmaceutical manufacturer based in Delaware, has agreed to pay the government $7.9 million to settle allegations that it engaged in a kickback scheme in violation of the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today. AstraZeneca markets and sells pharmaceutical products in the United States, including a drug sold under the trade name Nexium.

“We will continue to pursue pharmaceutical companies that pay kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Hidden financial agreements between drug manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers can improperly influence which drugs are available to patients and the price paid for drugs.”

The settlement resolves allegations that AstraZeneca agreed to provide remuneration to Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy benefit manager, in exchange for Medco maintaining Nexium’s “sole and exclusive” status on certain Medco formularies and through other marketing activities related to those Medco formularies. The United States alleged that AstraZeneca provided some or all of the remuneration to Medco through price concessions on drugs other than Nexium, namely on Prilosec, Toprol XL and Plendil. The United States contended that this kickback arrangement between AstraZeneca and Medco violated the Federal Anti-Kickback statute, and thereby caused the submission of false or fraudulent claims for Nexium to the Retiree Drug Subsidy Program.

In 2003, AstraZeneca had to pay $355 million to resolve criminal charges and civil liabilities related to marketing practices and drug pricing.

In 2010, AstraZeneca was forced to pay $520 million to for a fraud case that involved allegations of bribery and kickbacks in order to push schizophrenic medications.

In 2015, AstraZeneca was ordered to pay $7.9 million in a kickback scheme. Seems that the finances weren’t exactly on the level.

AstraZeneca has also been in Canadian courts many times, often involving patents and intellectual property disputes.